Actually, reading the article again, its quite plain that the section on tanks in WWII on "Tank" page 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank#World_War_II 

 Is far superior to this one in providing information on tanks in WWII. In addition, there a numerous other pages on WWII tanks and tank actions that provide a wealth of information on the subject. 

 This page also makes some truly bizarre assertions such as  

 "The sheer power of American production, superior combined-arms tactics and German errors on all levels meant that the American forces generally prevailed. Interestingly, this was the same pattern that was seen at the beginning of the war, when weakly armored and undergunned German panzers crushed their much more powerful French, British and Soviet opponents in the early blitzkriegs." 

 Now to say that the german forces in 1940 were undergunned and weakly armoured compared to their British and French adversaries certainly raises an eyebrow. While its true that the French had a small number of good tanks like the Somua, the majority were Renault R35, and some of the ludicrous Char 3c, neither of which had any place on a modern battlefield. The British had no tank to match the Panzer III or IV. In any case the German success in 1940 had little to do with the quality of the tanks and everything to do with introduction of a modern style of fighting and the concurrent collapse of French communication and morale. 

 To compare the Allied advances in 1944 and 1945 with the 1940 blitzkreig is glib to say the least. 

 I therefore propose that this article is deleted.