Talk:Battle of Krasny Bor

message: From what I read here on this article, the Soviets achieved their mission objectives and the Germans (well, Spaniards really) failed to prevent the Soviets from achieving their mission. Casualties should not have to do with victory, unless it is a really pyrrhic one. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 01:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have my full concurrence in the sense that objectives and not casualties determine a victory. What I'm not sure about is what the Soviet objectives were and how much of them they actually achieved (I didn't write the article, mind you)–the introduction seems to imply that the Soviets captured a piece of strategically useful ground, but I have trouble reconciling this with the geography I've seen elsewhere. It looks to me from this map that the 250. Division was positioned astride the Moscow–Leningrad highway, not parallel to it. The Russians by February 13 seemed to want to throw the 250th across the Izhora; notice the Spanish managed to cling to the east bank. At any rate, since the Wehrmacht in the end recaptures the town and seems to still be blocking both rail and highway, I'm having trouble figuring out how that leaves "the main road to Moscow" in Russian hands. But anyway much of what I've seen on the Web, while vague, seemed to imply some manner of German victory. Albrecht 03:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. Thanks for the explanation. It would be best if someone with more expertise in this battle (not me definitely :p ) cleaned it up a bit. -- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 06:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: German victory?

message: Let us compare two battles: 
*Battle of Sevastopol October 30, 1941-July 4, 1942 - duration 240+ days
*Battle of Krasny Bor February 9 - February 13, 1943 - duration 4 days
If you split BoS into separate assaults comparable in scale with BoKB, you will have, like, at least 20 Soviet  victories here that consisted in simply holding off. The same holds for each siege. Essentially it consists of a chain of victories of besieged and possibly (only possibly) one victory of the assaulting side. But this black-and-white won/lost classification for a battle simply does not reflect the reality. To make the classification in unclear cases basing on some objectives set is just as POV as anything else. One may very convincingly argue that the Siege of Sevastopol was not one but a chain of Soviet glorious victories, because Sevastopol achieved its objective: to hold off the overwhelming forces. 
It is pretty much conuter-intuitive to use the word "victory" in a situation when the winning side's success amounted to sitting tight. IMO the meanigful record for the "outcome" should be "Spanish/Germans held" (notice another problem with the currnt verison, it was not "German" victory, if any, it was Spanish). mikka (t) 19:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I take the last words back. "sitting tight" is actually called tactical victory in military, and that's what must be written into the battlebox. mikka (t) 19:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Three points:
#At no point was Spain ever at war with the Soviet Union. The Spaniards at Krasny Bor had volunteered for service in a unit of the Wehrmacht, the German army. "Spanish victory" is meaningless; there was no "victory" for Spain.
#:OK. Still "german victory" sounds a quite misdireced here. I changed for more exact wording "Victory of German side", i.e., of "Germany and its Allies". mikka (t) 20:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am sorry, but I have no idea who you are addressing this to?  If Albrecht, I do not think he invited you to look at his contributions - I did.  On the other hand, I do not think I made a remark about 'Vaterloo', and what do you mean by "(1) Siege of Leningrad: You obviously don't see a grain of sense in your suggestion, if peeled off some grotesque phrasing."  If you could clarify who you are addressing and (if you address me), clarify what you are trying to say, I would happily reply. Andreas 13:48, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Misguided dispute

message: I find his behaviour and misrepresentation(distance from Leningrad compared to distance Vienna Prague) and continued reverts trying to shove an ideologically misguided and plain wrong POV into this article unacceptable. If this continues I recommend he should be blocked from editing. Andreas 08:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read WP:Vandalism#What vandalism is not. When you call a content dispute "vandalism", it is an offense which may lead to admin action. So take care. As for the article, I believe it should be listed for deletion. I googled for Battle of Krasny Bor in Cyrillic and found zero results. Even the websites specifically devoted to the Battle of Leningrad ignore this action. The 1000-page Great Patriotic War Encyclopedia, which enumeratees and details hundreds of military engagements on the Eastern Front, doesn't mention Krasny Bor. Not even once. If the article is original research, then please say so and we'll delete it. Cheers, Ghirla -трёп- 09:26, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are joking, right?  I suggest you look at the sources provided. Maybe you want to contact David Glantz. So far you have not provided a shred of evidence that anything you say is true, and your performance on distance measurement (Prague - Vienna = Krasny Bor - Leningrad) makes it obvious that you are not interested in serious contribution. Andreas 09:51, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Thank you for your correction on Vandalism.  I have found the more appropriate term. Andreas 09:53, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is actually very simple for you to prove that the article is fantasy.  Just show us what 55th Army was doing on 10th - 13th February 1943. Where was it stationed, what were its actions?  Provide the sources for your claims (e.g. army war diary), and you can make a case that this was a battle that is a figment of the imagination of the Germans. Soviet sources given by Glantz are Burov Blokada den' za dnem for fighting in the sector and Boevoi sostav chast'  for the OOB of 55th Army.  Andreas 10:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't like your habit of hyping up a minor engagement (e.g., Battle of Târgul Frumos), which even the most circumstantial accounts ignore and one of thousands that actually comprised the war, and then inserting it into the WWII battlebox on the par with Stalingrad ans Siege of Leningrad. I wish some really important event - such as Battle of Prokhorovka - benefitted from your attention rather than some obscure skirmishes which you claim as German victories. --Ghirla -трёп- 12:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I stated in the discussion of the battle box I think it is not appropriate for small engagements and it should be split to reflect this. The present battle should be a sub-article to Operation Polar Star which should be a sub-article to the Siege of Leningrad.  All of that does not excuse your bullying behaviour and your start of an edit war in this article, and I have no intention to further discuss more fundamental matters here.  Put up or shut up - what did 55th Army do on February 10-13 1943? Where was it?  Your veiled accusation that I am hyping up engagements that are German victories is noted.  You are talking without any idea of what you are talking about. Like Mikka, I recommend to you to look at my edits here before insinuating such rubbish. Andreas 13:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

text: No wonder Ghirlandajo did not find Krasny Bor in Soviet mil books. Indeed, it was one of tens of thousands of engagements, nonnotable from the Soviet point of view. 3 days, 11,000, big deal. On the other hand, it is no wondewr that it is remembered by Spaniards.  mikka (t)  19:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that is correctly identifying the crux of the issue.  It is not an important battle to Germans or Russians, but the Spanish volunteer formation in the east lost almost 50% of all its casualties in the almost three years it was fighting in this one battle.  That is why it warrants inclusion, as far as I am concerned. Andreas 13:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Beyond that, there can be no cause, in my view, for belittling an article because it's "not important enough." (barring outright fabrication, etc.) You'll notice that Battle of Gettysburg shares a Campaignbox with e.g. Battle of Aldie and another half-dozen inconclusive skirmishes. The Battle of San Juan Hill is lumped together with a minor action at Manimani. The French and Indian War Campaignbox, like the Eastern Front box, includes all actions in that theatre, be they large, decisive engagements like the Battle of the Plains of Abraham, the Battle of Sainte-Foy, Battle of Carillon; or the capture of small frontier posts like Fort Beauséjour, Fort Niagara, and Fort Ligonier. Moreover, while the battle proper might be a drop in the bucket of the Eastern Front, it's not like the Soviet 55th Army was a nonentity; a figment of someone's imagination. Had its Krasny Bor offensive been successful, I imagine the Germans at Leningrad would have been left in pretty bad shape, with a ripple effect surging out to all other areas of the front. Albrecht 17:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bullying by Ghirlandajo 

message: Please stop adding the Spanish Flag for the participant entry. Spain didnt participate in ww2 and thats it. The so called "blue division" was the 250 infantry division of the wehrmacht under german command and control. They may weared a spanish flag as insignia, but the means nothing as this was not uncommon for the foreign division of the wehrmacht and the SS. We already got through that at the Battle of Leningrad article. There is no need for an edit war for such a minor point. StoneProphet (talk) 21:30, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with you on the matter, but agree that there is no need of an edit war over this. Best Regards.--Darius (talk) 00:37, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish flag 

message: The Spanish troops were under direct command of general Emilio Esteban Infantes, not under Georg Lindemann. 
Avieso (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  The battle involved more than just the Spanish division, and the commander of the 18th Army was Lindemann.D2306 (talk) 18:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Emilo Esteban Infantes

message: Preserving here by providing this link. My rationale was: "c/e; npov; excessive intricate detail cited to non RS". --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:19, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edit