# Talk:SS Volunteer Sturmbrigade France

Hello @Brigade Piron: I wasn't aware about the convention I'd love to learn more about it, would you be so kind to forward me the talks about it. many thanks Aeengath (talk) 15:57, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Moved from User_talk:Aeengath#French_SS_Emblem
Hello, I wanted to let you know I adjusted the emblem so it more closely follows the source material. Namely the pattern of insignia portrayed in Littlejohn’s book. I find this version to be more accurate than the original I had uploaded. I would be interested in learning your opinion. VoltigeurFR (talk) 01:16, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @VoltigeurFR Thanks for the update, this is a clear improvement, it now follows the Littlejohn illustration closely and aligns with the description. Since the original source is also a stylised rendering rather than a photo, this seems like a reasonable and proportionate reproduction under {{PD-textlogo}}. Thanks for taking the time to improve it. Aeengath (talk) 05:28, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
After reading Littlejohn's book some more, in regards to the uniform regulations, it would appear that the Waffen-SS pattern of insignia would have been the only type in use by the Sturmbrigade, whereas when all the French units in the German army amalgamated into Charlemagne, there was a far greater range of variation in insignia and their placement (page 170), as a result I believe it would be more accurate to say "worn by some volunteers" for Charlemagne rather than the Sturmbrigade. I can provide a screencap of the passage from the book if you'd like to get a better idea of what I'm talking about. VoltigeurFR (talk) 20:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for raising this @VoltigeurFR, I think “some French volunteers” applies here too because the source says: “Uniforms were entirely German without French insignia of any description. The blue/white/red shield (worn on the left cuff) did not make its appearance until well into 1944.” Since the Sturmbrigade was active from July 1943 to September 1944, the insignia appeared quite late in its operational life, with no indication it was widely worn, especially as they wished to identify with the Germans rather than appear as a French unit (per same source), privately made insignia was worn prior to its official introduction and it is considered extremely likely that this practice continued (per Forbes, p.62) and Many veterans of the LVF retained the Army shield (Afiero p.35). You're absolutely right this applies to Charlemagne too, as the same Littlejohn page says: “When all the French units in the German army amalgamated into Charlemagne... there was a far greater range of variation in insignia and their placement.” Happy to adjust further if better sourcing turns up, but I think this strikes the right balance for now. Aeengath (talk) 08:03, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:SS Volunteer Sturmbrigade France/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Aeengath (talk · contribs) 11:48, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 00:22, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
I'll get to this shortly--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:22, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for taking this on --Aeengath (talk) 15:20, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Images properly licensed
No single-sentence paragraphs
Anything linked in the main body shouldn't be listed in the see also section.
Removed duplicate entries
Some of the info cited to Littlejohn, p. 159 is actually on p. 160
Corrected per source
Each individual sentence doesn't need to be cited. Consecutive sentences all based on the same source(s) only require a cite sentence after the last sentence. For example the two cite #17s could be usefully consolidated into the cite at the end of the paragraph
Consolidated Burrin, Littlejohn, Bene and Vergez-Chaignon
Captions generally do not require citations. The image itself should have a source.
Removed citations from captions and corresponding sources. Images are already sourced on Commons
Forbes, p. 499 says that Fenet was released in 1949, not 1959
Good catch corrected to 1949
Cite 6 doesn't really support the statement.
Replaced Porch w Paxton, added new source
More later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:56, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
was assigned with replacing German Army Do you mean that the unit was tasked to replace German Army units?
yes, the intended meaning is that the French battalion was tasked with taking over positions previously held by Wehrmacht units. I’ll reword it for clarity to "was tasked with replacing German Army units".--Aeengath (talk) 07:27, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
FYI, Forbes revised his book in 2022. ISBN 978-1-913336-18-9--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Replaced Forbes with Laruelle (Entangled Far Rights, University of Pittsburgh Press, 2018), which covers Fenet’s capture and release in 1949. This seems a stronger peer-reviewed source. Aeengath (talk) 07:49, 2 October 2025 (UTC)