Talk:Battle of the North Cape

message: Changed the name of one of the combatants to Germany.  "Nazi Germany" never existed as an official name.
--Vosselmans 10:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor edit 

message: Battle of russian armed icebreaker Sibiryakov with german pocket battleship Admiral Scheer was most nothern naval battle AFAIK.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.94.192.193 (talk) 07:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If there were only two ships involved then it wasn't a battle - just an engagement.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 18:01, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Northern battle

message: This obituary of Richard Pendered credits him with precise location of Sharnhorst.
Then, on Boxing Day that year, Pendered deciphered a message which located the German battlecruiser Scharnhorst off Lopphavet in Norway. She was surrounded and sunk later that day.
The Telegraph sometimes gets its facts wrong, it confused Colleville-Montgomery and Colleville-sur-Mer the last time I used it but does this make sense?   Boxing day seems far too late to allow the ships to be positioned.JRPG (talk) 13:37, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intelligence leading to sinking. 

message: I've trimmed the lists of the warships with JW 55B and RA 55A in the "Background" section. They are un-necessary, as the convoy themselves weren't attacked; the ones that were involved (the four destroyers from RA 55A which joined Fraser) I've listed in the "Battle" section. The details are on the convoy pages now anyway, so it'd be duplication to have them repeated here.</br>
Also, the lists were inaccurate; there were nine warships listed for JW 55B (in fact there were thirteen) and nine for RA 55A (there were fourteen).Xyl 54 (talk) 03:39, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background 

message: the info box in the german wiki says 1 battleship AND 5 destroyer on the german site - 1 battleship, 8 destroyer and 4 battle cruiser!
So something is here or there terribly wrong...!!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.133.199.160 (talk) 19:44, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The German wiki is correct, insofar as the Germans, somewhat exaggerating, called it a "battleship".  Histories are however written by the victors, and the Royal Navy, most English sources, and indeed common sense, indicates that in the English speaking world, battlecruiser is a more accurate designation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.180.236.245 (talk) 11:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

text: After a huge amount of discussion a few years ago it was decided that "battleship" was the most common term which has been used to describe Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, and this was used in the articles on the class and ships. As such, it seems sensible to also use it here (I preferred "battlecruiser", but the consensus for "battleship" was clear, and this was supported by heaps of sources). Nick-D (talk) 22:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The weather was appalling with heavy seas and snow flurries and the German destroyers fell back and were left behind by the Scharnhorst and so took very little part in the battle.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.126.91 (talk) 22:08, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  differences german wiki 

message: Ok, so I replaced the Atlantic Ocean campaignbox with a new Arctic Ocean one, because this battle did not take place in the Atlantic.  If there's a problem with this, feel free to revert and discuss.  Howicus (talk) 23:23, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Campaignbox 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Battle of the North Cape. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719185651/http://www.itnsource.com/shotlist//ITN/1971/01/16/FS160171067/ to http://www.itnsource.com/shotlist/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:25, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The quote on the page is incorrectly attributed to Commander Hitchens; it was said by his son and many years after the fact. It doesn't even make sense in context because Commander Hitches was present at the battle and so it's his "day's work" that's being alluded to here as being more heroic than Christopher Hitchens' (his sons) whole career as a writer. I  am going to fix this to correctly attribute it and move it to the aftermath section where it fits better but there's certainly an argument that the quote just shouldn't be on the page at all. It's a nice quote so I'm not just going to remove it but I can see the argument that it's just not notable. 109.148.23.136 (talk) 08:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quote from Commander Hitchens 

message: Shouldn't the article also include the Eisenbart wolf-pack in the German strength 
8 U-boats with whom the Scharnhorsts group were attempting to coordinate with in the strike on JW 55B. VSTAMPv (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  U-Boats