Talk:Battle of Moscow
Appearance
![]() | This article is undergoing a featured article review. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria.
Please feel free to If the article has been moved from its initial review period to the Featured Article Removal Candidate (FARC) section, you may support or contest its removal. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of Moscow article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days ![]() |
![]() | Battle of Moscow is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on October 2, 2007, October 2, 2009, October 2, 2010, October 2, 2013, October 2, 2016, and October 2, 2018. |
Featured article review needed
This Featured article is a 2006 promotion whose main writer has not been active for many years. There are problems raised on talk (above), considerable amounts of uncited text, and a MOS review is needed. If these issues cannot be addressed, this article should be submitted to Featured article review. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:58, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- I think I will be able to add missing references (or to change the text to address cn). Can you please look through the whole article and check it for other problems?--Paul Siebert (talk) 19:25, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- Sadly I have to agree with comments above. Stating in the lede that it was the turning point in the war without giving another perspective is a NPOV violation. Yes, there are a lot of RS which say so, but you can find lots of equally good sources saying that Barbarossa was doomed from the outset, or giving a different turning point (US entry into the war, El Alamein, Stalingrad, etc.) buidhe 21:45, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- It also doesn't meet MOS:IMAGELOC. buidhe 21:46, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- Citations and reference style needs an overhaul. I also find it odd that the article relies most heavily on the weakest sources in the bibliography (various memoirs) instead of the best quality secondary coverage. buidhe 22:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- The article is probably also on the short side given it covers one of the largest and most important battles of World War II: I doubt it covers its topic fully. Nick-D (talk) 10:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- The FAR is due, as the article has not kept up with the FAR requirements. For example, there are multiple citations to Guderian and Zhukov. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:05, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- The article is probably also on the short side given it covers one of the largest and most important battles of World War II: I doubt it covers its topic fully. Nick-D (talk) 10:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Citations and reference style needs an overhaul. I also find it odd that the article relies most heavily on the weakest sources in the bibliography (various memoirs) instead of the best quality secondary coverage. buidhe 22:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- It also doesn't meet MOS:IMAGELOC. buidhe 21:46, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- Sadly I have to agree with comments above. Stating in the lede that it was the turning point in the war without giving another perspective is a NPOV violation. Yes, there are a lot of RS which say so, but you can find lots of equally good sources saying that Barbarossa was doomed from the outset, or giving a different turning point (US entry into the war, El Alamein, Stalingrad, etc.) buidhe 21:45, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- I added Bellamy's "Absolute war" to the list of sources. This book was awarded the Duke of Westminster's Medal for Military Literature in 2008, the author is Professor of Military Science and Doctrine and head of the Security and Resilience Group, Cranfield University. It can be used as a source for many statements. I am going to add references to this book with exact page numbers to replace cn tags, memoirs, as well as references to TV films. I need some time to finish this work.--Paul Siebert (talk) 04:05, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Categories:
- Wikipedia featured article review candidates
- Wikipedia featured articles
- Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page
- Old requests for peer review
- FA-Class military history articles
- FA-Class European military history articles
- European military history task force articles
- FA-Class German military history articles
- German military history task force articles
- FA-Class Russian, Soviet and CIS military history articles
- Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force articles
- FA-Class World War II articles
- World War II task force articles
- FA-Class Soviet Union articles
- Top-importance Soviet Union articles
- WikiProject Soviet Union articles
- FA-Class Germany articles
- Mid-importance Germany articles
- WikiProject Germany articles
- Selected anniversaries (October 2007)
- Selected anniversaries (October 2009)
- Selected anniversaries (October 2010)
- Selected anniversaries (October 2013)
- Selected anniversaries (October 2016)
- Selected anniversaries (October 2018)