Template talk:WWII city bombing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Military history (Rated Template-Class)
MILHIST This template is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Temp Templates and modules do not require a rating on the quality assessment scale.


I am not convinced that this template is viable. This is for two reasons:

  1. It makes no distinction between strategic bombing and tactical bombing.
  2. If one looks at the RAF Bomber Command diary] then there will eventually be hundreds of entries and that is if it is going to list just the strategic targets. If the tactical list is to be included as well, then almost every city in Continental Europe (apart from those in neutral countries), North Africa, and East Asia, will be in the list.

I think that the subject is better tackled in an article and a category rather than in a template particularly as the bombing of a city like Wielun and say Rangoon has little in common other than they happend in the same global war. --Philip Baird Shearer 10:31, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I created this template in order to avoid stacking the "see also" sections of all the articles involved with too many links that are more or less about the same. Also, one could argue that mentioning or not mentioning the bombing of some cities in articles on bombing of other cities is POV, so I simply decided to list all of the wiki articles on city bombing together. It's good we have a separate article explaining the phenomenon and that's the way it should stay, this template is simply the way to list some of the bombed cities without having to list all of them under the See also section.
You have a point that with time this template might grow too large. However, the way it is now, it simply lists some of the most prominent examples. If it grows too large, however, we indeed might have a problem.
As to the distinction between tactical and strategic bombing - IMO it's of little relevance here. After all the result is still the same: human suffering, civilian losses and destruction of cities. Whether done by strategic high-altitude level bombers, dive bombers or fighter/bomber planes changes little. Especially that in most cases the forces attacking each of the cities listed were mixed.
Thanks for the add-ons. Halibutt 18:18, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

For the recipient there is probably little difference between an tactical and strategic raid. It is more to do with the scope. Many more cities were bombed for tactical reasons than strategic ones. Philip Baird Shearer 19:30, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Missing entries[edit]


There have been a number of additions lately of smaller towns and instances of what are closer to tactical bombing than mass strategic bombing. The matching articles are stubby and currently add little to the subject. The effect is to bloat the template - do we need to rethink the scope and contents? GraemeLeggett 09:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Lets removing any links which are not to specific bombing articles or are stubs, and make it clear that in the template that this is about strategic bombing not tactical bombing raids. There will be some hazy areas, for example I would incldude all Blitzed cities, even ports which were attacked early on in the Battle of Britain and could be seen as tactical. Likewise I would include the Rotterdam Blitz because it had strategic repercussions, even though it can be argued that it was a tactical raid.
I think for tactical bombing raids should be in templates at the campaign or theatre level if they are done at all. --Philip Baird Shearer 12:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


Perhaps we could split the template, or divide the entries within it, by year, perpetrator or target? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:55, 13 January 2009 (UTC)