Talk:Greco–Italian War/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

"See Aftermath section"?

Other articles on Wikipedia that link to the aftermath sections, typically don't include the word "Section" and simply say "See Aftermath" for instance, the articles on The Winter war and Operation Barbarossa, It looks simpler and cleaner, I know it's a small thing but was wondering if anyone would mind if "See Aftermath section" was changed to simply "See Aftermath" - DannyUK190 (talk) 15:58, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

I'd rather leave it as it is but I'll go with the majority.Keith-264 (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

I can't see it makes any difference either way -- not really worth discussing. Go ahead if you want. --A D Monroe III (talk) 21:19, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2017

Was wondering if we can change the flag icon next to the British Royal Air Force commander John D'Albiac... Instead of the British flag that is being used now change it to the Royal Air forces Ensign: SJCAmerican (talk) 19:10, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: In infoboxes, country flags are preferred to service flags. See the Manual of Style guidance on flags for more information. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:32, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Two versions of the Churchill quote?

"Today we say that Greeks fight like heroes, from now on we will say that heroes fight like Greeks"

This is the version that is specified in Clogg. I also ran a GoogleBook search and found four sources that use this specific wording including two links to US Congress records: see here.

"Hence, we will not say that Greeks fight like heroes, but that heroes fight like Greeks"

However, Doomwings13 (talk · contribs) was not necessarily incorrect with their edit that changed it to the above. More sources seem to support this wording, see here.

I shall leave it to other editors to establish which one to use, if they are in fact just alternative versions of the same quote and not two separate and similar sayings by Churchill.

Regards, EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 01:58, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

"Rising to 430,000" - Greek forces?

Afaik this figure includes all of the Greek forces mobilized against the German invasion as well, and weren't actually on the front against the Italians, should they be included as this article is covering only the Greek/Italian operations? SJCAmerican (talk) 22:09, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

"Mountainous terrain"

The Lede states: "The Italians had to contend with the mountainous terrain on the Albanian–Greek border"

That may be an understatement. The border is in part formed by the Pindus mountain range, a 180 km-long extension of the Dinaric Alps. The mountain range forms a "vast complex of mountains, peaks, plateaus, valleys and gorges". Dimadick (talk) 10:07, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

How do you think it should be described? SJCAmerican (talk) 03:51, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Greek logistical situation in early 1941

Its certain that the addition of such a section in such a detail and about the one side raised serious wp:UNDUE issues . This UNDUE becomes even more severe when we consider that there is extra detail about the organization of the Metaxas line and the Yugoslav border, not to mention that the entire section is based on one and single source. On the other hand the chaotic situation of the Italian site in Jan. 41 is absent: world-wide humiliation and a desperate attempt to call for German intervention as a last resort.Alexikoua (talk) 14:05, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm, I think the section is warranted, as the war in Albania did clearly have an impact on Greek ability to resist the Germans in Macedonia. It is definitely not WP:UNDUE to point that out, nor that Greece was running low on ammunition, and the source used for this is high quality (and relies on official contemporary sources). However, the section might be better off split and worked into the article later on, with the ammunition etc deliveries by Britain in a section about the British contribution to the war, and the impact on the Metaxas Line that better fits in the "Aftermath/Analysis" section, because this is not, properly speaking, part of the campaign in Albania. Constantine ✍ 18:42, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

The way this is presented it mentions only specific aspects of the logistic situation: for example it ignores that British support was extremely weak both in men and material, the fact that a significant number of aircraft (even pre-war orders) were never delivered, even the fact that harsh winter conditions made Greek logistics difficult is absent. As you also noted some info fits better to aftermath section since its not part of this campaign.Alexikoua (talk) 15:55, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

This section should just be omitted completely I don't understand why it has it's own section, I think it should be deleted and it's contents should be added to other parts of the article we can add the first part of it detailing the Greek situation after the spring offensive to the "Italian spring offensive" section, and the 2nd part of it can be added to the "effects on Greece" in the "Aftermath" section. furthermore I agree with you, it seems one sided to go into such detail for Greece, more information should be added for the Italians situation as well SJCAmerican (talk) 19:28, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree that some details for better placement in context are necessary; however the main thrust of the section, that Greece had exhausted its pre-war stockpiles and was in need of British assistance (regardless of whether it came or was sufficient in the first place) to replenish them remains a valid one and merits inclusion. All the histories I've encountered, including in Greek, stress the fact that Albania was a sinkhole in men and materiel, which was mostly drawn from Macedonia, with obvious effects when the Germans invaded. Ideally, of course, this should be combined with data on Greek ammunition production, and analogous information for the Italian side. But absence of information on the Italian situation is not an argument for removing the information of the Greek side; and I hope no-one seriously argues that the two countries were remotely comparable in their war-making potential (if anyone should be inclined to suggest that the situation for the Italians was worse). The Greek "miracle" was a miracle precisely because a country with little in terms of indigenous industry, or large manpower reserves, threw back a country which was considered one of the Great Powers. Constantine ✍ 21:19, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree, I think the contents are fine to include, but better placement is needed SJCAmerican (talk) 03:43, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

The section is also written in such detail that's become bigger compared to the Spring offensive creating serious UNDUE issues. I agree that this piece of info should be placed in the correspondent section(s) but it also needs some trimming because it deals with extremely in depth (and sometimes boring) detail: almost every single purchase order is listed about: 105mm, 85mm, and 155mm artillery ammunition, boots, helmets, uniform cloth, tents, cars/trucks, cases of artillery fuses, cases of artillery shells, Italian 75mm shells, Italian mortar shells, cases of .303 ammunition, rounds of Italian rifle ammunition, Italian rifles... as so on. I don't believe that this deserves more attention & detail than the Spring Offensive & some trimming is warranted.Alexikoua (talk) 19:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Some of this information is already elsewhere in the article which is why it seems strange to add it again, for instance in the header: "At this point, losses were mutually costly, but the Greeks had far less ability than the Italians to replenish their losses in both men and materiel, and they were dangerously low on ammunition and other supplies. They also lacked the ability to rotate out their men and equipment, like the Italians.[6] Requests by the Greeks to the British for material aid only partly alleviated in the situation, and by April 1941 the Greek Army only possessed 1 more month's worth of heavy artillery ammunition and was unable to properly equip and mobilize the bulk of its 200,000-300,000 strong reserves." — Preceding unsigned comment added by SJCAmerican (talk • contribs) 18:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Simplifying the "Strength" section in campaign box

It just feels like it's overwhelming the reader with information, are separate troop numbers really needed for each month of the conflict? Is it really necessary to include how many animals the Italians had and information on artillery pieces? There is just too much there, this section should be simplified, just stating the amount of men the Italians and Greek deployed all together to the front, or we can have a number for the start of the war and then then a "rising to" number that will show the numbers towards the end. SJCAmerican (talk) 19:09, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 August 2018

Hi, idk how this works, but the first section of the articles says that WW2 started the 2nd of September, 1939, however, that's wrong, it was the 1st of September. That's it. ScramH (talk) 13:27, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 14:20, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Result

Why results are removing? The revertion of the italian attack, the dispalcement of the warfront in Albania, the stalemate and thw German invasion, were all events. Aftermath is a further despription about details and other related situations of this war. Inspirduser (talk) 02:12, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

This has been discussed already. If you want to change it consensus should be had first SJCAmerican (talk) 09:54, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Analysis

There ought to be a sub-heading for Turkey, in particular Churchill's ambitions for a Turkey led alliance against Germany. Turkey stayed neutral partly because of the defeat of the British and Greek forces. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8801:E00:D450:913B:88CD:AB7:C3EE (talk) 03:47, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

WW2 began on Sep 3, 1939?

Why does the article say "World War II began on 3 September 1939" while it's the Sep 1 which is the widely recognized date of German invasion of Poland?

McCartney~plwiki (talk) 10:58, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Because between the 1st and 3rd of September the only countries at war were Germany and Poland, thus not making it a 'World War', it only becoming one with the French and British declarations of war on September 3rd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.173.127 (talk) 09:08, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

The 209 RAF plane losses were inflicted by the Germans

Therefore, they don't belong in this article which is about the Greco-Italian War. Source: The Italians were held but the Germans intervened with massive airpower in April 1941. Greek resistance was overwhelmed and the British evacuated what forces they could. In the retreat, the RAF lost 209 aircraft in combat. or destroyed and abandoned, plus 150 air crew. So it was the Germans not the Italians who caused the 209 RAF aircraft to be destroyed. When I saw the 209 number, I thought something was up, especially when I saw the quoted source was not inline. So I searched for an inline reliable source to get the reason for this very high number of RAF losses. It made the heroic Brits look like newbies unable to fly when compared to the losses sustained by the Greeks and Italians. But then I discovered why. Dr. K. 06:45, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Can you explain where you read that the RAF losses where inflicted (only) by the Germans? The quote is from Terraine book.

The RAF arrived in Greece in Mid-November and they soon started to suffer losses (beside obtaining air victories), while overclaiming heavily their victories http://surfcity.kund.dalnet.se/commonwealth_pattle.htm: British claimed 150 air victories plus the 64 claimed by the Greeks while Regia Aeronautica suffered just 65 losses. The Germans invaded Greece on the beginning of April and after few days the war was over. By the way you are not allowed to revert my post on your talk page. Please follow wikipedia rules, if you insist I shall be forced to regard your behaviour as vandalism. --Gian piero milanetti (talk) 07:37, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I presume, since you are on Wikipedia, you know how to read and you know how to click. I gave you the quote from Google books in my previous reply, so read it, and then click on the quote to see the book. And while you're at it, don't you ever again associate me with vandalism. It is considered a personal attack and you can get WP:BLOCKed for it. Consider this your final warning. Dr. K. 08:06, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

By the way you are not allowed to revert my post on your talk page. No, wrong. I am allowed to revert your posts. Read WP:OWNTALK before you make any more WP:CLUEless remarks. Dr. K. 08:42, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

"Consider this your final warning"?! This is not the way to relate to another wikipedia contributor (among other things with thousands of contributions to his credit) or the tone with which to express himself. I cannot associate your name with vandalism, would this be my last warning? But who do you think you are to talk like this? If you delete, as you have already tried to do in the Greek aviation article, a useful contribution of mine with a reliable source, this is vandalism and I will be asking for a block of your profile if you continue to do so, wikipedia is not your private garden. Take care.

--Gian piero milanetti (talk) 17:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

If you delete, as you have already tried to do in the Greek aviation article, a useful contribution of mine with a reliable source, this is vandalism and I will be asking for a block of your profile if you continue to do so, wikipedia is not your private garden. OK, I got it. You continue to make the same WP:CLUEless personal attacks against me, despite my final warning. This is not a promising sign, as it indicates that your learning curve has flattened-out with zero slope near zero. Because of that, I will give you a formal WP:NPA warning on your talk. You can also go to an admin and ask for a "block of my profile", as you put it, because the irrelevant fact that you are proposing, that the Germans caused the RAF to lose 209 planes, will not be allowed to enter this article. You can also report me at WP:ANI, if you prefer. However, before you do that, click on this final link and read it. Dr. K. 18:40, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I do not see any personal attack, so to me it is better to put the question in the hands of an admin "super partes". When I wrote If you delete, as you have already tried to do in the Greek aviation article, a useful contribution of mine with a reliable source, this is vandalism and I will be asking for a block of your profile if you continue to do so, wikipedia is not your private garden. I was referring to your deletion of this contribute of mine that I had to put back in the article : << On 30 October, two days after the start of the war, there was the first air battle. Some Henschel Hs126s of 3/2 Flight of 3 Observation Mira took off to locate Italian Army columns. But they were intercepted and attacked by Fiat CR.42s of 393a Squadriglia. A first Henschel was hit and crashed, killing its observer, Pilot Officer Evanghelos Giannaris, the first Greek aviator to die in the war. A second Hs 126 was downed over Mount Smolikas, killing Pilot Officer Lazaros Papamichail and Sergeant Constantine Yemenetzis.[4]>> in the article about "Hellenic Air Force". Regards --Gian piero milanetti (talk) 21:06, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I think we have enough problems with this article to try and discuss another article on this talkpage. This edit should be discussed at the talkpage of the HAF. In any case, your edit at HAF had issues and was reverted because of these issues. If you want to discuss them, we can do so at that talkpage. However, you forgot to mention that your second edit at HAF was not reverted. Do you know why? Because you fixed it. You removed some original research and weasel words, so it became acceptable. However, let's be clear: Under no circumstances you should insinuate that good faith edits are vandalism. If you insist on doing that, sooner or later you will get blocked. Dr. K. 22:43, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Error

In the section about the German offensive, Yugoslav is misspelled as Yugolav GigaDerp (talk) 16:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request

FYI

 – Heading added by Tenryuu for better archiving.

• What I think should be changed:
• Why it should be changed:
• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Holloman123 (talk) 15:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

References

Hello. I would like to request a change to add even more info since this is the most important battle of WW2 as you know and the first win of the Allies. Let me know if you can let me add this info. Thanks in advance wikipedia.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Seagull123 Φ 16:35, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Since this is one of the most important battles if not the most important one, and the first official win of the Allies I would like to make some good changes to one of my favorite websites, and the best for knowledge, Wikipedia! First of all I would like to make it clear about the casualties. The military casualties of the Hellenic Army were 20.000 in the whole world war 2 so in the Greco Italian around 10k and with the wounded and other things it would go 60-70 and not 83 but ok. 13,755[3][4][5] dead 50,874[3][4] wounded 25,067 missing (21,153[4] of whom taken prisoner) Total combat losses: 89,696 52,108 sick 12,368 incapacitated by frostbite 64 aircraft (another 24 claimed)[2]

General total: 154,172 The Italian Army's casualties are around 154k (Source: https://ww2db.com/country/greece)

(this was from an old wikipedia page and that's the correct one i cannot understand why it changed)

Secondly, we could add even more to the equipment of both countries. For example add To the greek army around 1006 artillery (most gotten from the other wikipedia pages, in the counter offensive of the greeks and some other sources, 100% correct), the greek army had some thousands artillery at the time but thats what they used on the greco italian war only (the article). We could also add machine guns. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotchkiss_M1922_machine_gun 6000 used it says but it's +600 captured, so we could have 6600 in total.

We could also add other things since the Italian things has been added. For example: several light tanks and half armored cars(Armored vehicles of Greece: Greek army in 1940 had only several half-armored cars “Peerless” (bought in 1920s for police units), two light tanks Vickers Mk.E (bought in 1931 for trials – one had two turrets) and eleven old French FT17 light tanks in three companies of 19th motorized division (bought in 1920, they were used against Italians in 1940 at Albanian Front).

In 1940/1941 there were also near 50 British Bren carriers in Greek Army, also 40 Italian tankettes CV3/33 were captured in 1940 and used in 1940-41 battles. All those armored vehicles were lost during the battles with Germans in 1941.

(You choose what you add from this, I don't suggest the 40 italiank tanks because these were in the German invasion and had already been added to another wiki about Greek Army, so in conclusion I would write: Several Light tanks and Half armored cars)

Now, a small correction to aircraft. They weren't 97 but 160 in total USED. Total – 160 aircrafts in service

Fighters: 2 + 14 Gloster Gladiator (since 1937 - Gladiator I, since 1940 - Gladiator II), 36 PZL P-24 (since 1938), 7 Avia B.534 (since 1936), 9 Bloch MB.151/152 (since 1940).

Bombers: 12 Fairey Battle (since 1939), 12 Potez 633B2 (since 1939), 76 Bristol Blenheim (since 1939).

Reconnaissance: 55 Breguet Br.XIX (since 1925), 30 Potez 25 (since 1931), 16 Henschel Hs 126 A-1 (since 1939).

Seaplanes: 12 Dornier Do 22W (since 1939).

Also in 1930s: 8 Ansaldo A.1 Ballilla (since 1921); 12 A.W. Atlas (since 1926-1928); 18 Avro 504 (since 1921/1925); 18 Blackburn Dart (since 1925-1926); 12 Fairey IIIF (since 1931); 2 Hanriot HD-17 (since 1926); 6 Hawker Horsley II (since 1926); 4 Junkers G.24he (since 1931); 8 M.S. 147 (since 1925); 25 M.S. 230 (since 1931).)

This in total are more than 160 but 160 is the number that got used in the battle so 160 is the correct one.

We could also add this. 10 destroyers Several Battleships 2 Cruisers 6 submarines Several corvettes

from the Greek Army and add the submarine to the Italian side "delfino" because it sank the cruiser Elli with a torpedo. 

(Of course you include that in the article, but I want these all to be in the right column as you understand so it can be more fascinating, with more detail and fixed).

I hope that I helped you dearly Wikipedia! Much love. If you need something else from me to edit this I will immediately answer! Have a great day and a happy new year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holloman123 (talk • contribs) 04:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

@Holloman123: I really appreciate your enthusiasm. It's clear that this is something you care a lot about, and that it's important to you that we get it right. I am a bit confused what specifically you would like to change, and how you would like us to go about it. Where are you getting these figures for equipment, aircraft, etc? I see that you are sometimes citing Wikipedia and adding numbers together on your own -- which suggests a lot of your own research, and I appreciate that. But Wikipedia is based around citing external material, not citing Wikipedia itself. (See WP:CIRCULAR!) So, I would be happy to make these changes if you provide a specific and acceptable citation for each change you wish to make. For instance, you can say something like According to LINK, the Greeks also had 3 of these planes, which the article's sources don't consider. And according to LINK, they also had 5 of these. So add 8 in the infobox. See how I provided the links, but also where I want the change? Urve (talk) 11:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Sir, in addition to your reply https://www.haf.gr/en/history/historical-aircraft/

2 (Avia B-534 (verze II) + 5 (Avia BH-33SHS) + 9 (Bloch MB.151) + 12 (Bristol Blenheim Mk IV) + 11 (Fairey Battle B.1) + 19 (Gloster Gladiator Mk I) + 16 (Henschel Hs 126K-6) + 36 (PZL P.24F/G) + 1 (Potez 633 B2 Grec)+ 1 (Savoia – Marchetti S.M. 79-I Sparviero) + 24 (Potez Po 25 A2 “Avion Grec”) + 14 (Fairey IIIF MkI/III/IIIM) (It was used in the Greco Italian not as a bomber but for the missions, it was a Naval Cooperation Hydroplane- for analysis see this if you like http://greek-war-equipment.blogspot.com/2011/12/1929-1941-fairey-iiif.html) + 12 (Dornier Do 22Kg) = 162 Of course Greece had around 250 more but they were trainers and others but they were not used in the war.

Also Greece had around 80 more in the Invasion of Germans, but we include only the Greco Italian used ones. So, I gave you the info of the official HAF in this. (src)

Re: Greek Artillery 1941

1. 4Post by The Edge » 30 Sep 2009, 09:23

Regarding the artillery of the Hellenic Army in WWII, the following systems were in service:

Heavy Howitzers Schneider Mle 1917 (155mm) 60 Heavy Howitzers Vickers-Armstrong 6’’ (152,4mm) 25 Heavy Howitzers Skoda M.14 (149mm) * 11

Heavy Guns De Bange 1878-1916 (120mm) 6 Heavy Guns Schneider M.1925/27 (105mm) 48 Heavy Guns Krupp (105mm) * 3 Heavy Guns Schneider M.1925/27 (85mm) 48

Mountain Howitzers Schneider Mle 1919 (105mm) 120 Mountain Howitzers Skoda M.1916 (105mm) * 7

Mountain Guns Schneider Mle 1919 (75mm) 192 Mountain Guns Schneider - Danglies M.1908 (75mm) 48 Mountain Guns Skoda M.15 (75mm) * 22 Mountain Guns Puteaux Mle 1906 (65mm) 110

Field Guns Schneider-Canet M.1908 (75mm) 56 Field Guns Schneider M.1907 (75mm) * 4 (Serbian) Field Guns Schneider M.1904 (75mm) * 20 (Bulgarian) Field Guns Krupp M.1904-1910 (75mm) * 128 (Turkish)

908 + the others above

• Captured during the previous wars from Bulgarians & Turks.

Regarding the antiaircraft and antitank artillery of the Hellenic Army (army.gr), when Italy declared war on October 28, 1940 the following systems were in service too:

A/A Artillery: 39 Krupp 88mm (24 Army + 15 Navy) 4 Bofors 80mm (Army) 6 Vickers 76mm (Air Force) 20 Terni ??? 40mm (Navy) 57 Rheinmetall 37mm (54 Army + 3 Navy) 108 Rheinmetall 20mm (Army + Navy) 32 Hotchkiss 13,2mm 192 Canon de 75 M(montagne) modele 1919 Schneider

A/T Artillery: 24 Rheinmetall ATG (37mm) 24 Boys ATR (14mm)

TOTAL: 1,222

Other source

otal units 14 5 + 1 brigade 1 1 Infantry regiments 3 (each with 1,100 men and 58 officers, armed with Mannlicher M1903/14 rifles) 3 (each with 1,100 men and 58 officers, armed with Mannlicher M1903/14 rifles) 3 (theoretical - in March 41 total only 2,000 men) 2 cavalry ( + 1 motorized in progress of formation) Total men 12,000 12,000 c. 12,000 (theoretical - in March 41 only 2,000 conscripted garage workers) ? Machine guns 264 (216 light Hotchkiss 8mm, 48 heavy St Etienne M07) 264 (216 light Hotchkiss 8mm, 48 heavy St Etienne M07) c. 264 (on paper) c. 144 Mortars 24 (81mm) 24 (81mm) 24 (theoreticaly) c. 24 Howitzers and Fieldguns 36 (16 x 75mm mountain guns, 8 x 105mm guns, 12 x 65mm mountain guns) 48 (36 x 75mm-M1897 field guns, 12 x 65mm mountain guns) c. 36-48 (on paper) 4 (75mm mountain guns) Tanks - - 24 light Italian CV33 and Dutch tankettes and a few Bren Gun Carriers 4 squadrons of armoured cars (this is not 100% correct but still useful) (https://www.ww2-weapons.com/greek-armed-forces/#Greek_Army) (https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=158435)

Some others sources also from Wikipedia itself (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:World_War_II_artillery_of_Greece)

So, as you can understand I would like more info about the Greek Army to be added for example the artillery since you have added the italian ones. And as you understand I want them to be added here (https://prnt.sc/wigib7)

As I analysed to you dear Sir, I want them to be added because this is one of the most important battles (if not the most important of WW2), and it's also a celebration in Greece every 28 October and everyone comes in Wikipedia to see this. So, I would like to be added Several light tanks (only 3 could be operated so if you want you add that). Air Craft 162 I provided everything from official HAF(src 1 in start) Artillery Pieces (1,222 i gave you src analytically + some sources from wikipedia itself) (And i am surprised how there wasn't putted any Artillery on the Greek Army before because that was what it basically saved them because they spent 20 billion drachmas for army and air force and navy but the artillery was old too so it has some history too)

And if you want add the navy too. For example add the submarine delfino in Italian side and add all the Greek Navy or at least Elli but I suggest you to put the whole Greek navy and some from the italian side because Greeks used the navy to operate during Italian war but it's your choice because I don't have many sources for that. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:World_War_II_naval_ships_of_Greece)

Also I suggest you to put the machine guns. 10.000 the minimum for the Greek Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauchat#Greek_use at least 4000 from Chauchat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPK_(Pyrkal)_machine_gun I sadly don't know the exact number but it is around 10 max. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotchkiss_M1922_machine_gun 6000 used it says it in Wikipedia too https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Hotchkiss_machine_gun around 15 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._%C3%89tienne_Mle_1907 (A lot of thousands but I don't know exact number so I just write it here) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarzlose_machine_gun There are more but you could add 10.015 (necessary like Navy since the correction on aircraft, several armored cars and artillery addition is important in my opinion)

So yeah. I hope that I gave you enough sources for what I suggested you! If you have any more questions or inquiries about the validation or anything else that you want me to correct, I can add it anytime. I just want some things to be corrected, that's all. Wikipedia is 100% valid of course and as I said one of my favorite websites but it wanted some fixes that I want so much to help and fix them "myself". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holloman123 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 29 May 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 13:23, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

---

Greco-Italian War → Italian invasion of Greece – Per WP:COMMONNAME, see NGRAMS[1] or Google Scholar[2][3] (t · c) buidhe 01:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nomination and per such other main title headers as Italian invasion of Albania, Italian invasion of British Somaliland, Italian invasion of Egypt, Italian invasion of France or Italian invasion of Libya. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 08:22, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose This title would be misleading. Except for the very first days of the conflict, the Italians did not invade anything, since they were soundly defeated by the Greeks who pushed back them beyond the border, occupying substantial parts of Albania until the German intervention. Maybe "Failed Italian Invasion of Greece"? Alex2006 (talk) 09:25, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose as unconvinced. Looking over the scholar results suggests that in several cases the opening attack by the Italians is being referred to rather than the whole five month period covered by this article eg "At the moment of the Italian invasion of Greece..." "In the months between the Italian invasion of Greece on 28 October 1940 and..." "More than half of the book is devoted to a detailed account of the “battle of Greece,” starting with the domestic and international background on the eve of the Italian invasion of Greece and ending with the battle of Crête" and one of the items is actually titled The Italo-Greek war in context: Italian priorities and Axis diplomacy. GraemeLeggett (talk) 07:37, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, it is exactly what I was saying: actually there was an Italian invasion of Greece, but lasted only a couple of days. In all the other cases; Albania, Brithish Somaliland, etc., either the invasion succeeded, or at least the Italians were able to maintain their positions a couple of months. Alex2006 (talk) 16:23, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

• Comment. While the proposed title may not be accurate, it seems to me that the current title is not either. It makes it sound like a separate, self-contained war, whereas in fact it was just part of WWII. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:19, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Not exactly: it was the last example of Italian "parallel war" ("guerra parallela"), that Mussolini unleashed without the knowledge of the Germans, out of spite for not having been informed of any previous Nazi invasion. Alex2006 (talk) 16:30, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
    • Still effectively part of WWII. I'm not sure it's generally regarded as a separate war. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:40, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
    • Actually no, the end of the "paralellel war" is the loss of Italian East Africa in May 1941 where the Germans were basically not involved. Barjimoa (talk) 06:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
      • I explained myself wrongly: for "end of parallel war" I meant end of Italian military initiatives without German consent. After the Greek Debacle Germans never allowed anymore an independent Italian major operation, and put the Italian armed forces more and more under control. Alex2006 (talk) 10:24, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose. This article deals with the entire Greco-Italian war, hence it would be incorrect to call it that way.Barjimoa (talk) 06:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Greek but not Italian logistical situation

I wonder why there is a quite large section about the mid-war Greek logistical situation, while on the other hand the Italian situation is completely absent. In fact something is quite wrong in portaying the mid war situation in a neutral way. Some info about the Italian side: [[4]]:

The Greek supply lines wokred better than the Italian, but the Greek too had problems. ... The Italian situation was worse, and even after more than a month of war the supply report on 4 December read: 'Reserve rations, nil. Equipment, minimal Woolen clothing, zero. Infantry ammunition, non. Artillery ammunition, insignificant. Arms and artilerry, all supplies, exhausted. Enginnering equipment practically nil. Medial equipement, inadequate.

Well it appears that both the lead and this section need some significant restructuring since it offer the wrong impression that the The Italian situation was not worse.Alexikoua (talk) 16:25, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

I was also wondering why the lead dedicates all that space to the Greek logistic situation. There was even more space dedicated to it a few months ago. Barjimoa (talk) 07:05, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Correct this part falls directly into POV since it offers the wrong impression that the Italians would have won the conflict without German intervention. It should give balanced information from both sides.Alexikoua (talk) 11:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2023

2A02:2149:8A4D:8200:7C90:C750:B735:1CA6 (talk) 19:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Put Greek Victory. Who deleted that. We are talking about the Greco-Italian war which ended in Greek Victory, not about the German intervention or the resistance. These are Aftermath

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Please ensure that you have established WP:CONSENSUS before requesting an edit. Actualcpscm (talk) 22:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)