Talk:Uniforms and insignia of the Schutzstaffel

message: According to an article on the Flags of the World (FOTW) website (), a Sturmbann was a battalion in the S.A. Hence, given that the vast majority of S.A. rank titles were used in the S.S., perhaps it would be more appropriate to translate the names of these ranks into English as "Battalion Leader" and "Senior Battalion Leader". (I have posted a similar comment in the appropriate article for the ranks of the Sturmabteilung.)
-Christopher Crossley, 22 August 2005 12:14 (UTC)
:The literal translation of the rank is "Storm Unit Leader" Sturm=Storm, Bann=Unit, Fuhrer=Leader.  The German word for Battalion is pronounced ba'ta'ion.  Sturmbannführers did command battalions, but that is not the literal trnaslation of the word. -Husnock 15:42, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ranks of S.S.-''Sturmbannführer'' and S.S.-''Obersturmbannführer''

message: It's somewhat strange how Reichsführer-SS is the equivalent of Generalfeldmarschall, as their was only one Reichsführer-SS but many Fieldmarshalls, and Himmler was certainly considered superior to almost everyone in the Third Reich. Is it sort of like the military police, when an MP with the rank of Corporal can in some instances tell a Lieutenant what to do. I imagine regular German Army Officers would have been fearful of even a low ranking member of the Gestapo.
:I don't really think Himmler was equivalent to a Generalfeldmarschall. He held ministerial rank, so like Göring was probably senior to ordinary field marshals, but it's the closest equivalent, being a unique rank. -- Necrothesp 19:23, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  Himmler certainly would never take orders for Goring and told plenty of Field Marshals what to do.  I've changed it to be the equivalent of Reichsmarschall. -Husnock 02:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  The rank of Reichsführer-SS is not the equivalent of Reichsmarschall since the latter rank was specifically given to Georing by Hitler (June 1940) in order to establish a clear line of succession from Hitler to Georing in the event of Hitler's untimely death.  Further, before the establishment of the SS rank Oberstgruppenführer (in 1942, and after Georing's appointment to the rank of Reichsmarschall back in 1940), the rank of Reichsführer-SS was much more likely the eqivalent to Generaloberst rather than Generalfeldmarschall.  The Wehrmacht was quite jealous of their place and position in German society and considered the SS (and much more so the SA) to be inferior organizations to itself.  These factors, individually and combined, do not support the idea that the rank of Reichsführer-SS was ever equivalent to Reichsmarschall.  I agree that Himmler (and the rank of Reichsführer-SS) were ministerial, but people like Albert Speer (and others) were also ministerial and they did not hold equivalent ranks of Reichsmarschall. Coldwarrior 05:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reichsführer-SS

message: I have been reverting several edits to this article regarding non-existent SS ranks.  The first such revert was that an Oberfuhrer in the SS was equal to a Brigadegeneral in the Wehrmacht...there was no such rank in the WWII Wehrmahct.  We also have reverts of Bewerber and Anwarter to the early 30s ranks, as these ranks did not exist until the later 30s with Bewerber first created in 1942.  Last, but not least, there is no source that I know of which states there was a rank higher than Reichsfuhrer.  "Oberster Reichsführer" is now up for deletion.  If I am wrong about any of this info or reverts, please advise with sources.  I have already talk paged the user who was making these changes. -Husnock 21:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Non-existent SS ranks

message: I have reverted the use of "Wehrmacht Equivalent" and "Waffen-SS equivalent" in the SS-General section since it seems redundent.  The Waffen-SS used regular SS ranks, like Untersturmfuhrer, Hauptsturmfuhrer, etc, but Waffen-SS Generals would act a suffix to thier regular SS ranks to form such titles as SS-Obergruppenfuhrer und General der Waffen-SS.  This is actually explained in the article.  The point is, Waffen-SS Generals didn't have or use Wehrmahct like ranks, they used them as a suffix to thier SS ranks.  It is also for this reason that I removed the title Allgemeine-SS from the column listing the SS ranks, since the Waffen-SS used them too. -Husnock 15:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Double Columns on Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS

message: Husnock-Stop revert my edits. You write not correct and not exact data! If you do not know Russian and German language-it your problem. The Soviet military ranks of the period of the second world war and their equivalence are written on many sites and in many books, especially in Russian. To not trust them at me there is no reason! German ranks SS and their equivalence are written on many sites and in many books including in German. According to them-Der Oberster Reichsführer der Schutzstaffel it's a the highest title and a rank in SS. This rank had no special uniform, because had it only Hitler. To challenge them silly! Tt1 18:07, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To answer your points.  1) There are no Russian ranks listed on this page 2)"Der Oberster Reichsführer der Schutzstaffel" does not appear in any text or source of World War II that I have ever read including original German documents form the SS (and I have studied the SS since 1986) 3)Per Wikipedia policy, disputed edits and unsourced information can be removed.  Your use of sockpuppets and edit warring only weakens your position and could lead to article protection. Provide a valid source, photograph, or other such document.  Otherwise your insertion of non-existent and non-factual ranks into this article will continue to be reverted. -Husnock 16:16, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

text: That is correct.  There is not a column on the page which addresses Russian ranks.  This is in response to the statement "The Soviet military ranks of the period of the second world war and their equivalence are written on many sites and in many books, especially in Russian".  That is not disputed, I only say that there are no Soviet military ranks liste don this page. -Husnock 21:57, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Waffen-SS ranks

message: Is this article ready for unprotection yet? It's been fully protected for six days now. howcheng  {chat} 17:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I unprotected a while ago it per the comments above. -Husnock 17:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. It was still listed on Wikipedia:Protected page (I removed it) so I was just following up on it. howcheng  {chat} 17:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotection? 

message: As far as i know there was NO Wehrmacht equivaltent for this rank. "Since Brigadeführer was rated equal to a Generalmajor, and Standartenführer to an Oberst, Oberführer had no military equivalent and became regarded as a senior Colonel rank." (See: Oberführer.) So as you see Oberst can't be an equivalent to Oberführer.</br>
--Yoto (German Wikipedia) 83.135.82.35 16:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oberführer 

message: There are several meanings for "Haupt" so I ain't sure if "head" is the right translation. 
Some of the meanings are for example: head, main, chief, primary, principal, general, central, leading.
So a Hauptsturmführer could maybe be a Main Storm Leader, a Primary Storm Leader or something else.
My english ain't that good, that's why i don't want to change the article, 'cause I don't know what's right. But I hope that you can manage it.</br>
--Yoto (German Wikipedia) 83.135.82.35 16:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of "Haupt" 

message: I have reverted the recent changes to the translation column.  The present translations are based on sources from World War II texts that are referenced in the article.  Chief among the problems is that "Oberst" does not mean "Chief" in German.  It translates as either "Colonel" or "Supreme".  There were also other changes to the article such as introducing a translation spelled "Casndidate" and stating that Sturmhauptfuhrer meant the same thing as Hauptsturmfuhrer when the words are clearly shifted.  This article has been too carefully worked to allow such slipshot translations into the text.  Thats how I feel. -Husnock 23:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, Husnock, but "slipshod" (note the correct spelling) is not the appropriate term here.  Your German is simply not good enough to make such an assertion.  "Oberst" is a military rank and is a derivative of the word "oberster" (corresponding noun: der Oberste"), meaning "uppermost" or "highest" or "chief".  Turning to "Haupt", as a noun it means "head", but as a prefix to another noun it means "main" or "chief".  Your alleged translations of these respective ranks are simplistic and do not reflect the correct meaning of the German words used to concoct them. You would not translate "Hauptstadt" (meaning: capital) into "head city", would you?  Or "Oberstdorf" (a famous wintersport resort in the Alps whose name means "uppermost village" or "highest located village" into "colonel village", would you?  But maybe you would.  Sincerly, Cosal 14:58, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't "my German" that is not good enough, I am not the source of this translation.  It's the acceptable translation of the ranks out of the sources for this article.  Every text book and reference I hav eon SS ranks says the translation of Oberst is Colonel and that the translation of Head is Haupt.  If it were Chief, I believe the translation would be "Chef".  Reverted once again.  Please provide a source for your trnaslation if you want to change this well established article. -Husnock 05:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I thought I had made obvious before, these are not necessarily "acceptable" translations.  A proper translation needs to translate a word within its context and take account of its meaning in the original language. That is why it makes no sense to continue to insist that "Oberst" means "Colonel" and nothing but "Colonel".  Yes, as an army rank "Oberst" is the equivalent of "Colonel".  But when "Oberst" is a prefix to a compound noun it means "supreme", and it is correctly translated in this manner in other military contexts, such as "Oberste Heeresleitung".  Likewise, "head" can be "Haupt" and vice versa, but "head" also means "Kopf".  Conversely, "Haupt" as a prefix to a compound noun does 'not mean "head" unless it specifically refers to the German meaning of "Kopf" such as in "Haupthaar" (meaning scalp hair).  In all other cases it means "main" or "chief" or "uppermost".  "Hauptgipfel" is the "main summit" of a mountain, not the "colonel summit", "Hauptstrasse" is "main street", not "colonel street", "Hauptstadt" is "capital city", not "colonel city". The article may be well established, and I do not dispute that.  But some of the translations shown are very poor and the article deserves having better ones. The fact that someone in the past came up with these inadequate translations is not sufficient reason to insist on their immutable right to remain in this article or for your claim to infallibility on this issue. Cosal 17:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation Changes 

message: What is the source for presenting the Totenkopf as the “coat of arms” of the SS? I didn’t even know the SS had a coat of arms, but if it did I would assume it was the SS runes. Please provide the source; if there is none, and this is merely someone’s assumption, then the flag/coat of arms gallery should go. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 11:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a minor point and not worth fighting about.  The original edits looked like someone who just didnt like the SS, since the caption was "removed inappropriate symbols".  As stated, nothing wrong with having SS symbols in an article about the SS.  But, yes, they should be accurately explained. -OberRanks 21:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for presenting the Totenkopf as “coat of arms” 

message: The article begins:
"The ranks and insignia of the Schutzstaffel were a paramilitary rank system used by the SS to differentiate that organization from the regular German armed forces, the German state, and the Nazi Party..."
Does anyone know of a more specific reasoning than this? I read one time that creating new ranks was done in an effort to combat the hierarchicalism that was thought to be implicit in the use of traditional titles like "sergeant", "general", and so on...but also that maybe it was part of the larger National Socialist effort to Germanize the language, since traditional military ranks come from French (they originated during the Napoleonic era).
Anyone else have the answer?
Critic9328 02:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deeper explanation of reason for creation of new titles? 

message: I would like to open the floor to a discussion regarding restoring the six to seven insignia images which were deleted out of these article.  The raze about these being stolen appears to have past over and most of the people who had major problems with this article seem to no longer be active on Wikipedia.  For my own part, I never stole any of those pictures and most of them came off a CD from College Park which is where the SS records are kept and which is where I did my graduate level work (i.e. how I came into possession of the CD).  I do however agree that some of the images on that CD also showed up on other people's webpages but as they are simple designs (pips on black background, etc) I see no copyright problems.  I can create such images in Windows Paint and re-post them (I actually did this for a different website) but I do not want a problem to again occur.  If we do re-upload what tag should be used?  Opinions are most welcome. -OberRanks (talk) 22:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would certainly like to see those insignia graphics back, but I do not know the legalities as others seem to know (if they indeed do know something about that at all).  Why are the existing insignia graphics supposedly fine but the ones that were removed not?  My own view is that they were all fine (no copyright infringement) but again, I don't really understand the original motivation (legal details) for removing them in the first place. -L.Smithfield (talk) 00:43, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The debate at Commons about deletion is here. Kelly hi! 00:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Getting those insignia pictures back in this article

message: But the RAF/RCAF (British Royal Air Force) used the ranks of Squadron Leader, Wing Commander, Group Captain the same way and earlier--to indicate the size of the unit that the rank-holder was presumably capable of leading.71.175.189.23 (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fuehrerprinzip? 

message: I have just finished a major article revamp and rewrite, cleaning up the months and years of image deletions and duplicated material.  I intend to add even more mateiral over the next several months.  Hopefully, this can one day become a featured article. -OberRanks (talk) 20:18, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice job. The article is much improved. One thing which would be nice, assuming free/fair use images are available, would be comparisons of the SS eagle with the Wehrmachtsadler and the Party/SA/Early SS cap eagle. Solicitr (talk) 18:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Major article Revamp

message: Currently the article reads
 In all, there were three possible numbers: SS(1), for members of the Deutschland Regiment, SS(2) for Germania personnel, and SS(3) for members of the Das Reich Regiment. These insignia would survive throughout World War II and were kept in use after the three original regiments had expanded to brigade and division strength.
 
With regard to the third regiment I believe this to be incorrect.  At the start of the war the SS-VT consisted of four regiments: LSSAH (no number), SS-VF-Standarte 1 Deutschland, SS-VF-Standarte 2 Germania, and SS-VF-Standarte 3 Der Fuehrer.  This last was recruited in Austria after the Anschluss and was not ready to take part in the invasion of Poland. During the Sitzkrieg the three numbered regiments were combined into the SS-Verfuegungsdivision, which over time would be renamed Reich and then Das Reich, and numbered 2 (after 1 LAH and before 3 Totenkopf drawn from the SS-TV)Solicitr (talk) 18:18, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds right.  I always get confused what the 3rd one was. -OberRanks (talk) 22:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SS-VT collar tabs

message: I'm not crazy about the link "Uniform of a tank leader with the rank of an Obersturmbannführer of a combat force of the SS-Totenkopf-Division."  This is a repro uniform which is bad in several respects; even if we ignore the very postwar rubber-soled boots, the dual Totenkopf patches are all wrong. TK-Div personnel (by regulation) wore rank on the left collar like all SS men.*  There was a very unauthorized practice by a few SS tankers to imitate the Army Panzertruppe and wear skulls on both collars, but these were Army-pattern skull pins, not embroidered SS TK's (I don't believe I've ever seen a legit left-hand TK collar patch).  I'm also not crazy about the mismatched cap insignia, although one can't say with certainty that it never occurred. [*Even the Polizei Division once it was formally merged into the Waffen-SS]Solicitr (talk) 17:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont like the link either. -OberRanks (talk) 00:07, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Done.Kierzek (talk) 16:31, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove external photo link? 

message: The security forces of the SS, such as the uniformed Gestapo, and the Sipo and SD troops which were part of the Einsatzgruppen, were also all considered part of the General-SS even though many of these persons (especially in the field) wore uniforms nearly identical to the Waffen-SS
I'm leery of calling Gestapo and Kripo "security forces of the SS" and especially "all considered part of the General-SS."  In fact Himmler was fiercely opposed to granting blanket enrollment of policemen into the SS; he made it clear when the Polizei-division was merged into the Waffen-SS that its Orpo personnel were *not* to be given SS membership except through the standard application and background-check process.  Even at the end of the war many Gestapo and Kripo personnel were not enrolled in the SS; and though in some circumstances they wore SS uniform, they did so with police shoulderboards to mark their status as cops.  SS membership was a formal status which did not necessarily apply to everyone who worked for Himmler. Solicitr (talk) 17:26, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to tweak and change as needed.  The main point is that the security people with the RSHA and Einsatzgruppen typically DIDNT have Waffen-SS rank - yet they wore similar grey wartime uniforms.  The whole "explaining the two ranks" was the main point of that large addition. -OberRanks (talk) 18:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Query on new material 

message: Currently the article at least strongly implies that the SS was coming up with its own ranks and rank insignia independent of the SA prior to 1934.  But this isn't the case; the SA, much the larger organization, was the one creating new ranks for its ever-expanding membership, and the SS followed along; even if the SS had become de facto independent on an operational level, administratively it was still part of the SA and even funded from the SA budget. Solicitr (talk) 18:16, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good point - they were part of the SA back in the early days and the ranks were connected.  I'm sure editing the article to reflect this shouldn't be that difficult. -OberRanks (talk) 15:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Good edit Solicitr. I have not checked as I am at work but do the other articles of Stennes and Daluege now need additional work as to the revolt in question. I can check tonight if no one else gets to it first. Kierzek (talk) 18:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Photographic evidence of Himmler wearing his early uniforms with the number of leaves is probably where those dates come from.  I also have a book called "photographic History of the Reichsfuhrer-SS" that gives his dates of rank.  Another thing to remember is that in the early days of the SS all you had to do was throw on oak leaves to say you were in charge.  Exact dates of rank and titles were not so strictly enforced until after the Nazis came to power in 1933.  Also, from 1929 Himmler called himself Reichsfuhrer and thought of himself as an equal to the SA Chief of Staff, even though the SA Supreme Command didn't.  Himmler probably didn't pay much attention to what his exact SA rank was -  in his mind he was the Reichsfuhrer.  Anyway, I have several sources for this and will do the research.  This actually seems more like a problem for the Heinrich Himmler article than for this one although there is some cross over material. -OberRanks (talk) 20:37, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That makes sense; Himmler in practice could do whatever he wanted.  I expect that he wore three leaves by virtue of being Reichsfuhrer whatever his paygrade was.  Is there a dated photo of Heini wearing three leaves with a pip, the insignia of an Ogfhr?  And what about Daluege? It might be the case that  in 1930 Ogfhr was a 'special appointment', a title and not exactly yet a rank, that Hitler could make, to reflect Himmler's and Daluege's authority over multiple Gruppen each- which pretty much makes it a rank.Solicitr (talk) 21:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adjustment to rank development needed? 

message: Adjusted because he didn't actually join the SS until '33. The old text implied he was already an Ofhr. Solicitr (talk) 00:59, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tweak to Diebitsch 

message: SS Ranks 1931
Obergruppenführer
Gruppenführer
Brigadeführer
Oberführer
Standartenführer
Sturmbannführer
Sturmhauptführer
Sturmführer
Obertruppführer
Truppführer
Oberscharführer
Scharführer
Mann
On my browser, the above table causes a screen error- mainly there is HUGE amount of white space between the bottom of the table and the next section of text.  These titles are also covered in the 1932 section and later on in the WWII section. -OberRanks (talk) 18:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Mine has not shown to have a problem but I can't speak, ofcourse, for others. Kierzek (talk) 22:49, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No screen error on my browser either. Alastairward (talk) 23:00, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Also works fine in Opera. I left it in (after correcting its errors) because it gives a nice quick reference to ranks which otherwise are scattered through the text, and a snapshot of the transitional stage when the SS was largely but not entirely independent of the SA.  Solicitr (talk) 23:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

text: How about now? --Solicitr (talk) 03:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Stray Table

message: The article doesn't event mention this title, which on de wiki has a dedicated article (:de:Reichsarzt-SS)... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  00:02, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that was the SS Surgeon General, one person who held it was Ernst-Robert Grawitz.  It was primarily a title, not a rank.  By all means, write the article about it. -OberRanks (talk) 00:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Reichsarzt-SS]] 

message: Could some one somehow delete that annoying phototgraph in the table?--Der Spion (talk) 21:13, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what photo you are referring to. -OberRanks (talk) 19:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final SS Ranks 1934-1945 

message: could someone please remove that annoying photograph with the caption "A concentration camp SS-Scharführer wearing a late war gray-green uniform. The silver-gray braid on the collar was used by all SS non-commissioned officers" which has been placed right in the table! thank you in advance!--77.180.221.99 (talk) 11:56, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem must be with your browser settings.  It's fine on my screen. Solicitr (talk) 17:00, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't know about browser settings... I have the same problem with it making large parts of the ranks table unreadable I'd move things around to alter that if I even knew how. --Svartalf (talk) 14:33, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree the problem must be with your computer settings. The article page displays fine for me, as well. Kierzek (talk) 14:47, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Remove Photo 

message: The reason I have reverted certain edits is herein explained: The MOS as to military terms does set out the difference between nouns and proper nouns; ranks and titles. With US ranks it is easier to make the call on whether something should be in caps or not. With german ones, especially Nazi Germany, it is more delicate. First, it should be noted that all of the major books concerning german and SS ranks use caps all the way through. See for example:
*Lumsden, Robin (2000). A Collector's Guide To: The Waffen–SS, Ian Allan Publishing, Inc.  
*Lumsden, Robin (2001). A Collector's Guide To: The Allgemeine – SS, Ian Allan Publishing, Inc.  
*McNab, Chris (2009). The SS: 1923–1945, Amber Books Ltd.  
*Mollo, Andrew (1997). Uniforms of the SS, Collected Edition Volumes: 1–6. Motorbooks Intl.  
*Yerger, Mark C. (1997). Allgemeine-SS: The Commands, Units and Leaders of the General SS, Schiffer Publishing Ltd. . 
So per Wikipeida MOS one can argue, "accepted proper noun, as indicated by consistent capitalization in sources". However, I believe in being more flexible and believe that many recent changes could be said to meet Wikipedia MOS. The problem with the germans and Nazis was that many of their ranks were also titles of position. So they would be proper nouns, such as: "Josef 'Sepp' Dietrich, 20 April 1942 (und Panzer-Generaloberst der Waffen-SS". It would be like saying, "The Duke of York" or "Reichsführer-SS". Kierzek (talk) 02:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Simpler reason: in German, all nouns are capitalized. Solicitr (talk) 19:49, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the info. I always knew Solicitr you know the German language better than me. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 02:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  German Military ranks and titles & MOS 

message: ===How are the uniforms of the Reichssicherheitsdienst or Sicherheitsdienst described?===
These descriptions are missing from this article.
I noticed while watching the excellent BBC documentary on Auschwitz, that the actors in the dramatised scenes wore a mixture of uniforms. Some wore the M1936 tunic, the classic SS grey but others wore lighter grey jacket/tunics with white shirt and black tie, plus jodhpur-style riding pants. It was hard to work out at first but I noticed that SD men wore the later style of uniform. Whereas the SS-TV along with, I guess, Allgemeine SS, wore traditional service uniform with buttoned-up collar.
Likewise a good selection of properly researched uniforms was on show in the German film Downfall. Again it appeared the SS guards in the Fuhrerbunker, all wore slightly modified uniforms that distinguished them from a "ordinary" Waffen SS soldier. Any thoughts?
: Yes, it was a mess, wasn't it?  The "regimented" Third Reich was always characterised by non-uniformity in uniforms!  Basically, by the time Auschwitz was built the SS-TV, the camp guards, had gone over entirely to the same uniform as the Waffen-SS, almost but not quite identical to the Army M36 and its variants (in actual practice Waffen-SS men were often issued Army uniforms with SS insignia; differences were very minor).  On the other hand, members of the SD and other branches of the RSHA (including, in Poland, the Gestapo) wore the grey open-collar uniform appropriate to their status as Allgemeine-SS rather than Waffen-SS.  I'm not sure what 'lighter' tunic you're referring to, unless it's the white summer jacket- but that was de-authorized by that date. Could it be that some SS officers privately purchased gray linen summer tunics like the one Stauffenberg had?  But then I'm confused by the jodhpurs, which as far as I recall only existed in black for the SS. Just guessin', but were these Army-pattern uniforms with stone-gray breeches, which by contrast made the feldgrau blouse look lighter?
: Another guess- could these in fact be green-jacketed Orpo, Ordnungspolizei? Did these light uniforms have contrasting cuffs?
: As to Downfall, I'm not sure.  I would be wholly unsurprised if Hitler's personal retinue weren't visibly distinguished in some manner, and that would be worth including in the article if a source could be found. Solicitr (talk) 17:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two points 

message: These descriptions are missing from this article.
I noticed while watching the excellent BBC documentary on Auschwitz, that the actors in the dramatised scenes wore a mixture of uniforms. Some wore the M1936 tunic, the classic SS grey but others wore lighter grey jacket/tunics with white shirt and black tie, plus jodhpur-style riding pants. It was hard to work out at first but I noticed that SD men wore the later style of uniform. Whereas the SS-TV along with, I guess, Allgemeine SS, wore traditional service uniform with buttoned-up collar.
Likewise a good selection of properly researched uniforms was on show in the German film Downfall. Again it appeared the SS guards in the Fuhrerbunker, all wore slightly modified uniforms that distinguished them from a "ordinary" Waffen SS soldier. Any thoughts?
: Yes, it was a mess, wasn't it?  The "regimented" Third Reich was always characterised by non-uniformity in uniforms!  Basically, by the time Auschwitz was built the SS-TV, the camp guards, had gone over entirely to the same uniform as the Waffen-SS, almost but not quite identical to the Army M36 and its variants (in actual practice Waffen-SS men were often issued Army uniforms with SS insignia; differences were very minor).  On the other hand, members of the SD and other branches of the RSHA (including, in Poland, the Gestapo) wore the grey open-collar uniform appropriate to their status as Allgemeine-SS rather than Waffen-SS.  I'm not sure what 'lighter' tunic you're referring to, unless it's the white summer jacket- but that was de-authorized by that date. Could it be that some SS officers privately purchased gray linen summer tunics like the one Stauffenberg had?  But then I'm confused by the jodhpurs, which as far as I recall only existed in black for the SS. Just guessin', but were these Army-pattern uniforms with stone-gray breeches, which by contrast made the feldgrau blouse look lighter?
: Another guess- could these in fact be green-jacketed Orpo, Ordnungspolizei? Did these light uniforms have contrasting cuffs?
: As to Downfall, I'm not sure.  I would be wholly unsurprised if Hitler's personal retinue weren't visibly distinguished in some manner, and that would be worth including in the article if a source could be found. Solicitr (talk) 17:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: How are the uniforms of the [[Reichssicherheitsdienst]] or [[Sicherheitsdienst]] described?

message: I'm not going to change the assessment because this isn't my area, but start-class? This article is massive, surely it deserves better. (Good work all involved by the way.) — Hex (❝?!❞) 19:32, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article class 

message: It is unreasonable to show UK Brigadier as equivalent to this rank, when USA Briagadier-General is show as equivalent to a different rank, since both the British Brigadier and the USA Brigadier-General are both NATO O6 (USA style O7) rank.   Probably the confusion is caused by not understanding that the SS split the Army Wehrmacht, Heer) rank Oberst into two, since the the oberführer rank is is also incorrectly shown as having no Heer equivalent.  
I have therefor changed this table to eliminate the none equivalents for oberführer and move the brigadier to the right place.  Michealt (talk) 21:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: As I wrote in the past: Oberführer had no military equivalent and quickly became regarded as a senior colonel rank. Yerger, 1997, p. 235. This distinction continues in historical circles with most texts referring to Oberführer as a senior colonel rank. Yerger, 1997, p. 235; Miller, 2006, p. 521; while some others state it has a military equivalent to a British Army brigadier. McNab, 2009, p. 186. That is what the WP:RS sources state. OberRanks is correct. Kierzek (talk) 02:14, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Crazy rank, even seventy years ago.  Maybe alter the chart to have Oberst spaced evenly between S-Fhr and O-Fhr to cover both ranks.  Beyond my Wiki formatting knowledge, I'm afraid. -OberRanks (talk) 03:42, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oberführer; equivalents 

message: You people should be ashamed of yourselves, writing about the uniforms and stupid little badges that these killers wore.  I know I could be "blocked" (oh no!) for removing some of these pictures, but thats all they are, fetish pictures for the neo-Nazis who love the pretty little black uniforms.  My granduncle was at Auschwitz and he had a cousin who died at Treblinka.  This is so sick having an article about the uniforms of killers.  I will be watching this and I will take this article down.  I know how to shift ip addresses and have friends at the Southern Poverty Law Center who can help me with pressure against Wikipedia to stop these articles.  Burn in hell, Nazis.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.36.34.7 (talk) 21:41, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Still, this is an historical book (encyclopedia). People want to know what happened then, and Wikipedia is the place to go. There is little point in taking the article down. It doesn't change history. If you want to know about Treblinka, for example, that article is there also. Surely you wouldn't want someone to remove that! Wallie (talk) 11:56, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad Article 

message: I added  tag to the article; please let me know if there are any concerns. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:55, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really see the tag as necessary.  This is a complex subject and everything in the article right now is sourced, referenced, and needed to provide a complete overview of this topic.  The only thing we could possibly do is split the article into separate works covering the time periods (i.e. "SS uniforms of the Second World War", "Early SS paramilitary uniforms", etc).  I don't see otherwise material being removed from this article in any other way. -O.R.Comms 18:10, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Except for edits for concision which could be done, I agree with OberRanks. This article should be detailed due to the subject matter it covers. Kierzek (talk) 18:33, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Next year after...a certain book might be published...there could be a possibility of creating an article just for the uniforms of the Allgemeine-SS.  The General-SS system of collar patches, cuffbands, and sleeve diamonds is an extremely complicated affair which would be outside the scope of this article and would warrant an article of its own. -O.R.Comms 19:22, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

text: The citation tag needs to be taken out and "citation needed" added to specific areas which there are problems.  The article citation tag was up for nearly three years with no discussion as to why it is there or what the problem was.  As for the other one (overly detailed), please advise what could be trimmed.  The technical nature of this subject makes all of the material relevant.  That tag is also frequently misused and generally requires consensus and a course of action proposed to move forward on it. -O.R.Comms 14:15, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I stated my opinion above so I don't really want to be redundant; with that said, it could use a small trim and cites added, but certainly this is a page/article which calls for great detail due to the subject matter it covers. I do believe that the section, "Uniform design and function" is somewhat redundant to that of the section "Uniforms designs and styles" and its sub-sections and information from the one, which is not repeated, can be transferred to the other in the appropriate places. Kierzek (talk) 14:37, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overly detailed article 

message: Mann - was a Private, Schütze wasn't actually a higher rank, but "priviligated Private" (not only in SS , Waffen-SS and the Wehrmacht/Reichswher, I'm pretty certain, they also was used in the Emperor's military, during WW1. Perhaps even older than so.) But fair enough, they fit within this scope too. Boeing720 (talk) 04:09, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  lowest ranks ("privates") 

message: The description of formal dress has been given a no citation tag; previously, no citation was necessary because the description was accompanied by a photograph: how did that get deleted? In fact, the key illustrations of the brownshirt and black uniforms have been removed too.  All three are legit and have (or had) the appropriate copyright info attached Solicitr (talk) 04:04, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special uniforms 

message: What were their uniforms like?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.255.165.198 (talk) 16:28, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  SS Helferinnen 

message: Is there a list of people who held the rank of SS-Gruppenführer? Thanks. Zerotalk 07:36, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  SS-Gruppenführer