Talk:Battle of Berlin/Archive 2

message: :Image:Polacy Berlin1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Polacy Berlin1.jpg

message: PBS, Your version of the disputed sentence is POV, which your edit comment proves. I don't see how
:Meanwhile, the Soviets were getting on with winning the war. The 2nd Belorussian Front had established a bridgehead on the east bank of the Oder over 15 km deep and was heavily engaged with the III Panzer Army.
is worse than
:Away from the map room in the Berlin Führerbunker with its imaginary attacks of phantom divisions, the Soviets were getting on with winning the war. 2nd Belorussian Front had established a bridgehead on the east bank of the Oder over 15 km deep and was heavily engaged with the III Panzer Army.
The latter version reeks of unencyclopedic tone and merely serves as taking a jab at Germany. Hitler was losing the war, but that's no valid reason to try to display him and his generals as maniacs. --81.227.92.40 06:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have any source which says the commands that came out of the Führerbunker on the 21/22 were anything but fantasies? Would anyone with any grasp of the real military situation have thought that Army Detachment Steiner could attack south and pinch off Zhukov salient and the 9th could and  4th Panzer Army could simultaneously do the same to Konev salient? What were the orders to Steiner other than orders to attack with phantom divisions? --Philip Baird Shearer 06:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: phantom divisions

message: I reverted a change that changed "Decisive Soviet Victory" for "Decisive Communist Victory". As possible vandalism. -Flubeca (t) 16:46, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Communist/Soviet

message: Actually, I'm in process right now (it will be some work). 
Please write a summary in the section. --HanzoHattori 06:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Philip Baird Shearer, I absolutely love your lack of attempt at discussing your edits. --HanzoHattori 08:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

text: There were three Russian fonts involved in the battle of Berlin. One the 2nd Belorussian Front fought in the battle but did not enter Berlin, they fought to the north. There were two German Army groups involved in the battle only one corps (Weidling's LVII Panzer Corps) of these army groups retreated into Berlin the rest fought outside Berlin and as the section details surrendered at different times to different people. While they were fighting the Battle of Berlin was not over even if the city had fallen because the Battle of Berlin includes the fighting in what would become East Germany. --Philip Baird Shearer 15:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

text: But the section is ABOUT THE AFTERMATH! It starts witb "The fighting did not finish with the death of Hitler and the capitulation of Berlin. Some of the German forces which had been fighting against the three Soviet fronts continued to resist up to the end of the War in Europe" and ends with "The Army Group Centre retreated south west towards Czechoslovakia, the majority of the 1st Ukrainian Front disengaged from the battle of Berlin and turned south to engage in the Prague Offensive, the last major combat operation of the European War, in which Czechoslovakia and its capital Prague were liberated and Army Group Centre, deserted by its commanding officer the newly promoted Field Marshal Ferdinand Schörner, was forced to capitulate a few days after the general German capitulation of May 7" - I don't know, read until you understand? Or do you think EVERYTHING was part of "Berlin Offensive Operation" (ending May 2), even the Prague Offensive Operation and the France-signed surrender of the garrision of Norway to the Western Allies? --HanzoHattori 23:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Calm down, people. Anyway, I've swopped around the sections on the immediate and more far-reaching effects of the end of the battle, which may help to make the narrative flow more natural. -- Hongooi 09:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  About moving 

message: Can I now insert back
Following Hitler's wishes in his last will and testament, on his death Admiral Karl Dönitz became the new Reichspräsident and Joseph Goebbels the new Reichskanzler. However, Goebbels' suicide on May 1 left the new head of state to orchestrate negotiations of national surrender on his own. The German high command and most German armed forces surrendered unconditionally to the Allies on 8 May 1945, which became known as V-E Day (the actual surrender took place the day before, but the ceasefire started on May 8). Although a few German units kept fighting a few days longer, the war in Europe was effectively over.
into the "End of the war in Europe" section? --HanzoHattori 09:14, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I said it's part of the aftermath - not the operation. I'm still saying this. --HanzoHattori 09:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Can I just say, unilateral reverts don't really help. I'll just redo my swopping of the aftermath sections, if people don't mind. -- Hongooi 09:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Um, please don't confuse me and HanzoHattori. I've only been involved in this catfight for the last half-hour. -- Hongooi 09:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thanks for the intervention, Hongooi  

message: I see no point in this section I think it should be removed. --Philip Baird Shearer 17:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --Philip Baird Shearer 09:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I see the point: the same reason as it was inserted. --HanzoHattori 11:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:   End of the war in Europe 

message: From the history of the article:
:14:03, 17 July 2007 HanzoHattori (Talk | contribs | block) (38,483 bytes) (→Battle in Berlin - you know what is REDUNANT? it's ALREADY in Wikipedia, what you do is NOT SUMMARY, there was no SEPARATE "Battle for Reichstag" even - it was too "in Berlin"! JESUS! stop this!)
A Google search will show you that this is a common name for this phase of the battle. There are often battles withing battles, they may or may not be called that but it is not uncommon for a particularly significant struggle to be named that. Eg the Battle of Dunkirk in the Battle of France or the Battle of the Seelow Heights in the Battle of Berlin or the Battle of the Tennis Court in the Battle of Kohima --Philip Baird Shearer 17:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dude. It's not OFFICIAL name AND it was nothing separate. It was just ONE of the targets of the Communist forces - other being Chancellary, Brandenburg Gate, Interior Ministry (aka Gestapo HQ, but it was more than this), Fuhrerbunker (of course), etc. The battle was for THE CITY CENTRE, and as such the government buildings and historical landmarks. The Soviets fixated on the burned-out shell of Reichstag for the odd propaganda reasons, for the Germans it was just one of the strongpoints (the building being big and sturdy). Militarily, much more important was the Zoo Flak Tower, for example. Actual political importance - none. --HanzoHattori 19:25, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Wait, what? You say it was.... not a German strongpoint? or something? Mind-boggling, again. --HanzoHattori 21:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

text: And what significance these ruins (not used or restored since the building was burned by the Nazis, in a meantime also bombed by the Americans) had to them, besides "we can use it as a stronghold to stop the Soviets coming through", according to you? --HanzoHattori 11:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Battle for the Reichstag

message: During the current round of co-editing the following text was removed. I am putting it here so that anyone who notices it missing and wishes to include it can find it easily:
:The Red Army made a major effort to feed the residents of the city.Beevor References p.409  However, in many areas of the city, vengeful Soviet troops (usually rear echelon unitsBeevor References Preface xxxv, pp. 326-327) looted, raped an estimated 100,000 women and murdered civilians for several weeks (see Red Army atrocities).Beevor, Antony; "They raped every German female from eight to 80" May 1, The Guardian, 2002 After the summer of 1945 Soviet soldiers caught raping were usually punished to various degrees.Norman M. Naimark. The Russians in Germany: A History of the Soviet Zone of Occupation, 1945-1949. Cambridge: Belknap, 1995 p. 92  By June 1945 when the Americans arrived in their sector of Berlin they found that average calorie intake of Berliners was low as they were getting only 64 percent of a 1,240-calorie daily ration, so "rape [by soldiers of the Red Army] had become an unnecessarily strenuous way of attaining something that in a wartorn, almost starving city, hundreds of women were willing to provide on professional or semi-professional terms"Ziemke, References pp. 149,153 The rapes continued however until the winter of 1947-48, when the problem was finally solved by the Russian occupation authorities by confining the Soviet troops to strictly guarded posts and camps.Naimark. The Russians in Germany, p. 79
--Philip Baird Shearer 09:57, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was confused: you removed it from the battle in Berlin article  09:18, 17 July 2007 and reinserted it back into this article 09:20, 17 July 2007 unfortunately it was part of such a large change (not just a re-insertion of that paragraph) that I missed the reinsertion, sorry for that. I will reinstall the paragraph immediately. --Philip Baird Shearer 18:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rape 

message: http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/battles_berlin.html quotes the Soviet Order of Battle for the Battle for Berlin (Le Tissier, pp. 196 – 207):
*1st Polish Army (Lt Gen S. G. Poplowski) 
*1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th & 6th Polish Infantry Divisions
*1st Polish Cavalry Bde
*4th Polish Heavy Tank Bde
*13th Polish SP Assault Artillery Bde
*7th Polish Assault Artillery Btn 
The name of the general was Popławski.
*2nd Polish Army (Lt Gen K. K. Swiersczewski) 
*5th, 7th, 8th, 9th & 10th Polish Infantry Divisions
*1st Polish Tank Corps
*16th Polish Tank Bde
*5th Polish Independent Tank Regt
*28th polish SP Assault Artillery Regt 
The name of the general was Karol Świerczewski.
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=123473 - Polish Air Force.
The Film Unit went along with the Polish Army and marched into Berlin, 
 - The 1st Tadeusz Kosciuszko Infantry Division and some artillery and engineer units took part in a street-fighting in Berlin (ZOO, Tiergarten).
Is it a problem to find the OoB before you remove something? Xx236 10:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No one is disputing that the Polish took part in the Battle. What is under dispute is adding information into the article without reliable sources. The two sources I used do not mention the  Polish contribution, so I did not include them it is as simple as that. One additional item that needs to be added to the order of battle is that the Polish First Army was part of the 1st Belorussian Front (Georgiy Zhukov) and Polish Second Army was part of the 1st Ukrainian Front (Ivan Konev). Also note that the Tiergarten park and the Berlin Zoo although nearly next to each other are not the same place. A bit like Regents Park and London Zoo --Philip Baird Shearer 11:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd suggest linking Ludowe Wojsko Polskie or Polish Armed Forces in the East, the latter particularly explains the situation.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  12:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Polish participation

message: "No one is disputing that the Polish took part in the Battle. What is under dispute is adding information into the article without reliable sources. The two sources I used do not mention" - you know, this is your problem (or problem with you). You want everything sourced, even if it's NOT disputed ("No one is disputing"). This with just everything. I find this, simply, very tiresome. I also told you you should ass the  marks if needed, or add the citations yourself, not remove stuff placing instead the redunant stuff everywhere (working both ways!) instead of the shortest possibly summaries.
Because someone asked, my summary of "in Berlin" in "of Berlin" was:
The battle of Berlin battle in Berlin started to penetrate the outer suburbs of Berlin on the April 23, 1945, and continued until May 2 when the German General Weidling surrendered the city to the Soviet General Vasily Chuikov (former commander in the Battle of Stalingrad) under Marshal Zhukov. Also involved in the fighting were the Polish soldiers allied to the Soviet forces.
Most of the defenders were members of the fanatical Hitler-Jugend and desperate Volkssturm militias composed of the boys and old men, and of the police, and paramilitary units of the hastily conscripted members of the Allgemeine SS and the SA; there were only about 45,000 regular soldiers from the undermanned units with few remaining heavy weapons, many of them members of the Waffen-SS units composed of the foreign volunteers. The main armament of the Nazi forces were the Panzerfaust infantry anti-tank weapons and generally the defence was improvised, without any real preparations against ground attack. There were also a futile relief attempts by the German forces outside of Berlin, as Hitler directed them to rescue the city (most of these units, however, attempted instead to breakthrough west in order to surrender to the Western Allies).
The Berlin S-Bahn railway system (including its underground sections) and the massive Flak Tower anti-aircraft bunkers serving as a centers of resistance (in particular the one at the Berlin Zoo) played an important role in the German defense, and the heavy fighting took place the area of the vast park of Tiergarten. The fiercest fighting in the city center concentrated in the area of the Reichstag building (probably mostly for its symbolic significance for the Soviets, who seeked to capture it by May Day). 
Berlin's civilian population was not evactuated and 2,700,000 civilians (3/4 of them women) suffered severe casualties when most of the city was destroyed by the fighting and the relentless Soviet bombardment by the massed tube and rocket artillery. After refusing to be evacuated, Hitler commited suicide in his Führerbunker shortly before the fall of the city, on the night of April 30. Many other Nazi leaders including Goebbels also killed themselves. 
Thousands of German soldiers and civilians managed to break out of the city the following night, led by the remnants of the Panzer Division Müncheberg, of which only few managed to get to the Western Allies while the rest of these attempting escape were captured or killed (Bormann disappeared). The battle effectively ended with the Soviet capture of the mostly abandoned Reich Chancellery on the morning of next day, after which the German military command in Berlin and most of the remaining defenders surrendered to the Soviets.
Pretty rough draft, as seen by the copyedit ask. (The Poles were just mentioned - I think the details like this should go into the specific article.) What is instead now is the main (specific) article edited to be shorter, but several times longer than my summary  anyway. --HanzoHattori 17:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The original dispute

message: :Image:Polish Howitzer Brigade Berlin.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 08:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Polish Howitzer Brigade Berlin.jpg