Talk:Pavlov's House

message: Yes I know this isn't really the place to be asking questions about the event, but there isn't really anywhere else on the internet that I could ask...
Why didn't the Germans fly bomber planes over Pavlov's house and destroy it? I'm sure there is a very good reason they didn't, but I haven't been able to find this out anywhere.
Thanks  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.101.68.218 (talk) 07:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  It was not a priority target for the Germans. You must remember that there were many other apartment houses throughout this large city occupied by Soviet soldiers with orders to never retreat under penalty of death. German command felt that aerial attacks that target barges filled with hundreds of Russian troops is more prudent than trying to attack a shell of a house with a dozen half-starved soldiers inside. Also you must remember that the city was in ruins. It was not easy to identify one burned out house from another. Meishern (talk) 15:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Got a question

message: I got logged off while writing. --Kolt 10:40, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: logged off

message: As someone requested for picture here, I tried to find a public domain one. I failed, although I was very close. Namely: I found an image in the book published in the USSR in 1975, which is available online. However, the template  is suitable only for images published prior to 1973. :- ( Cmapm 01:17, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Almost got a picture

message: Each time German infantry or tanks tried to cross the square and to close in on the house, Pavlov's men took them under heavy fire from within the basement, from the windows and from the roof top. Leaving behind a square covered with burnt corpses and steel, the Germans had to retreat again.
Isn't this a bit too melodramatic?
: No it's not. Otherwise it would have been just like any other skirmish of the war that is unknown today.
: I think the last sentence is a bit melodramatic, and unfitting for this article. Ravage. 8.mai. 2006
:This whole article is too dramatic  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.165.228.106 (talk) 23:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, heaven forbid a Wikipedia article portraying the Red Army in any way near heroic instead of the Wehrmacht taking this spot. The andf (talk) 21:39, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

text: exagerrtion yes  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.191.14 (talk) 17:48, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exaggeration? 

message: Are these mentions of computer games at all relevant? They could be construed as valid cultural references but look so absurd and unfitting sitting there under history which makes part of one of the most tragic events of the 20th century.
Yes yes I know "gaming IS culture", but can gamers please try for a second not to think about how this event pertains to their wrist reflex training activities but try to imagine the scale of actual real life suffering?
:Does 'Saving Private Ryan' bear mention for its depiction of the Omaha landings? It's possible for a game to represent an event just as a movie does; why is an action movie any more appropriate than an action game? It's not just this page that mentions games, they're mentioned alongside movies on the pages of many major battles. I think it is rather inaccurate to imply that gamers are unable to appreciate the gravity of war any more than someone who watches a movie or reads a book on war. In all of these cases isn't it true that the person knows more about the event afterwards than they did before?
sorry my fault - i got the picture wrong and thought it was the mill...sorry.
--I think the general rule is that movies and games are "pop culture" and as such don't really belong in an article that is not about pop culture. Also the last citation in particular is not accurate and does contain humor (crop circles etc).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeBoldInEdits (talk • contribs) 06:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is soon as you delete it, it gets added back by someone else. There are millions of game playing people who run to Wikipedia to make sure the scenario they just played is mentioned. It's a tidal wave of pop that is futile to resist. It's interesting, however, that Pvalov's House is also in many traditional wargames (of the paper variety), but you don't see them mentioned. As well as novels and other forms of pop culture. Again, no mention. Only the video games. In 20 years time this will pass as the video game generation ages out and the games are forgotten. Until then, resistance is futile. Green Cardamom (talk) 19:54, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No particular opinion on whether the video game references belong--I guess I would lean towards not, but with the article in its current state, they aren't the biggest issue. I did want to express admiration for your undoubtedly to-be-proven correct prophecy about the faddish transience of video games. Why, in twenty years, perhaps these kids will get over their "talkies" too, and we can return to God's intended light pastime: the admiring contemplation of handsome daguerreotypes. SS451 (talk) 10:08, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

text: Well, in any case the Dramatization section has been entirely removed, which I very much agree with. Gomedog (talk) 17:27, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dramatization 

message: He said that Germans lost more man than they were lost in the "battle" for Paris (not the liberation).  rebuke to the French military command virtually surrender without a fight
: Somebody changed this comment to read "Battle of Verdun". I editted back to "fall of Paris", because even though the statement is uncited either way, if Chuikov said that the Germans lost more men to Pavlov than at the Battle of Verdun, it is merely a facetious exaggeration that does not warrant inclusion in an encyclopedia. On the other hand, if he said that the Germans lost more men to Pavlov than they did in the fall of Paris, that statement may actually be accurate, and furthermore does contrast the scale of the conflict in a very interesting and succinct manner. - Aprogressivist (talk) 14:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Where did you even get "before" in there? Google translate? It actually says "this little group, while defending one house, has destroyed more of the enemy's soldiers than "hitlerites" lost in/while capturing Paris"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.3.179.107 (talk) 22:46, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chuikov comment 

message: Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 18:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 

message: Article states "once the tanks had approached to within 25 meters of the building, their thin turret-roof armor became exposed to AT rifle fire from above...Pavlov reportedly personally destroyed nearly a dozen tanks using this tactic."
So if Pavlov destroyed 10 tanks and his troops destroyed some more, what did the outside street look like? A parking-lot of burned out tanks? I have a hard time picturing a street with 20-30 tanks littering it and even a harder time imagining new tanks attempting to drive in such an area. German tank driver says "Sargent Fritz, I see 30 burned out tanks in front of us blocking the street, what shall I do?" - Answer??? Meishern (talk) 15:18, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair point, though on the other hand if that was true then wouldn't that have happened in lots of places, so perhaps not have been so surprising? My guess is that at night or during a lull one or either side moved them away as to reopen firing lines. But then again I can't really imagine what it was like in Stalingrad in 1942 from London in 2010, so I may be wrong. Prokhorovka ([[User 
talk:Prokhorovka|talk]]) 12:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

text: It doesn't seem far-fetched to me. Soldiers did move and depress these weapons, so why is Pavlov's House particularly suspect? I don't know whether Panzer gun elevation angles were as you say (a quick googling was inconclusive, maybe you had better luck?). Maybe they were but the terrain prevented them from maneuvering the tanks in the best position, with all the rubble and under heavy shelling. I agree a degree of propaganda from the Russians was likely involved, and a healthy dose of skepticism is welcome -- thankfully a more clear picture of the war has emerged once historians stopped believing *only* in German sources, which tend to exaggerate their efforts and downplay Soviet victories. As it is, Wikipedia is not the place for original research anyway; if reliable Soviet sources said it happened like this, this is what the article must state. The andf (talk) 21:56, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Tank Confusion

message: There are a lot of Russian language sources claiming this. This building was at the major crossroad to the river, so to assume this avenue was left alone by the Germans is unrealistic. All the adjacent houses had Russian army as well, so reaching the house was not easy. It was a difficult house to bomb by air because the whole city was in ruins, and picking out one ruin while dodging fire never worked out. Meishern (talk) 02:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Building attacked every day

message: Could I suggest a revision of this article using information found in Michael K. Jones' book Stalingrad: How the Red Army Triumphed which dispels some of the long-standing myths surrounding Pavlov's House. The book provides some of the only new info on this particular aspect of the battle in a long time with about 17 pages dedicated to the subject and testimony from survivors of the building's garrison. LordCraigus (talk) 21:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure yeah great idea. This article reads like myth. It should be written like "so so scholar said X" or "such and such soldier reported .." or "It's long been reported that.. but XYZ has since found .." Green Cardamom (talk) 19:58, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  A lot of this article appears to be mythical, see: https://warspot.net/312-unknown-stalingrad-pavlov-s-house-anatomy-of-a-legend Pluke (talk) 13:31, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stalingrad: How the Red Army Triumphed 

message: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyQ3sRU9pbc#t=7m35s  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sioux90 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation For Attack Everyday