"

 Recent edits by dapi 

User dapi did several edits which look for me kinda strange or even bias

the infobox

some weeks ago i created the infobox with good reliable data, mostly zetterling koltunov frieser. i created notes so that everyone can check
fast which units had how much men/tanks. this numbers were near perfect now dapi changed into the numbers of glantz, who seems to be a bit dubios
. glantz was earlier convicted for using russian extrem propaganda like rotmistrov, his books cited rotmistrov and used faked sources.

what was changed? the infbox now has lower numbers for men, this is explained fast and easy. The menpower before was the so called Verpflegungsstärke
, iam missing the english word but this means the strengh was every listed personnel in this units so auxillary units were included. i decided to take
this number becuse most articles use this number. but the russian number dropped by 900.000. this is explained easily too. glantz/dapi ( i dont know if glantz
really uses this number ) didnt count the entire steppe front ^^ i explain this ""trick"" with tanks:

the tanks: we can see perfectly on the tanks. before dapis edit, the infbox showed 4.900 russian AFV but now only 3,155. i looked my sources and find
1,607 tanks for the central  1,699 voronez that makes 3,306( this is glantz numbers plus some tanks), this number is already higher than glantz ""numbers"" but now it comes, he totally forgot 
the steppefront
with 1,632 tanks, the same steppefront which used many of his armies to support the southern wing. to exclude the steppefront is nothing less than russian bias and vandalizm
. during operaiton zitadelle the westernfront and the brijansk front started attacking the german units both fronts together fielded another 3,200 tanks lol . but this
troops are no included. i dit not include this troops too because i was aware that this will be reverted but to be honest all participating russian fronts fielded
~8,000 tanks ^^( to compare please take zetterling who wrote a book about the numbers of kursk ) but glantz achieve a much lesser number with excluding entire fronts. alone rotmistrovs 
5th Guards Tank Army fielded 800 tanks and attacked mansteins tropps^^.
so the russian numbers are simply selective, if a front took part or dont doesnt madder... .but why are the german tanks so high now?

while glantz is excluding entire russian fronts he brings a strange number for german tanks, when i check the sources i found 3,534 tanks ( zetterling/frankson wrote a book only about 
the numbers behind kursk, frieser and the german ministry for militarystudy support with primary data) for the eastern front. glantz brings 3,155 tanks . lol . i dont know were this numbers 
came from but this would mean that the 3 german armies had 90% of all tanks in this 3 armies ( one is only armygroup ).
this is bullshit we have a list for all german units and tanks, glantz number is wrong. the joke is while he excludes the entire steppe front brijansk and westernfront he dont excludes all
the german reserves which werent used like the tankcorps around the 5th SS wiking this units werent used. but the used russian units are excluded . heavy bias.... . i can support my points with
sources . i would suggest dapi does the same and we discuss the book of glantz. please tell me what glantz says why he excludes the other fronts.... . to avoid such bias i created notes so that every
reader can click and see immediate which army/front had how much tanks, that was good i think....

dapi comments his changes with ""removing unreliable ed"" []
he calls frieser ( and the Militärgeschichtliche Forschungsamt Deutschland and his 5 co-autors ) zetterling/frankson ( they made a book only about the numbers of kursk ) and koltunov unreliable even
krivosheev becomes ""dubios"" for user dapi [].
while he uses glantz who was punked by blatant propaganda[] and seems to fake numbers to support his fact
that red army didnt need numerical superiority. a interesting example is that dapi uses glantz to cite 350 tank losses for prokhorovka ( the mythbattle) and the same book is used to cite 340 losses
for the complete ""zitadellecampaign"" -) . here it must be noted that user dapi89 is a big fan of frieser, he is citing him always when talks about blitzkrieg and to revert edits on the blitzkrieg-
page. so his opinions is not straight...

other edits which elimanted every