Talk:Battle of Tannenberg

message: I cannot find the article on the Tannenberg war memorial, perhaps something could be added at the end of this article, or if I am missing it, a link to the war memorial article. thanks --Jadger 03:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: nevermind, I found it. --Jadger 03:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: War Memorial

message: Can someone check into the Russion numbers? My reading indicates that Samsonov had 150,000 troops and Rennenkampf had 200,000, but the box shows 150,000 for both Samsonov and Rennenkampf. I don't think this is correct, but I don't have any resources handy at the moment. Perhaps the box is referring to those troops that were actually present at Tannenberg, but in this case, then Rennenkampf should not be listed as a commander. CrackWilding 17:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I corrected the numbers. cheers 141.13.8.14 16:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Numbers

message: I thought the British and French were called the Entèt not allied. Allied they were named in the second world war.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.209.35.73 (talk) 07:00, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The term "Allied Powers" was commonly used later in World War I, after the United States had entered the war on the side of Britain and France. Prior to that, they were typically known as the "Entente Powers," after the prewar Anglo-French accord that Russia later acceded to. But in modern use, the term "Allies" is often used for the side involving these countries, regardless of the time frame being referred to. Jsc1973 (talk) 21:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allied 

message: Shouldn't the location of the battle be Hohenstein (the modern town of Olsztynek), instead of Allenstein (modern Olsztyn) as currently stated in the article? Olsztyn is located much more to the north and, moreover, it is in fact Olsztynek the place near Grunwald. --83.49.214.110 (talk) 12:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I answered myself. Olsztyn is not much more to the north, just 30 km north of Olsztynek, but it is a much more important city, so in fact, it's perfectly correct to state "near Allenstein (modern Olsztyn)". Sorry for the misunderstanding. --83.49.214.110 (talk) 12:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Olzstyn or Olzstynek? 

message: The Tannenberg Monument was destroyed by German army engineers and not by Russians (Soviets?) and poles.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.221.68.11 (talk) 10:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Destruction of the Tannenberg Monument

message: There are contradicting sections in the article referring to casulties on the russian side. Earlier, the were listed as 160,000 and now they are listed as 90,000. Yet the section called "The main battle (26 August to 30 August)" list them as 160,000 with 92,000 captured and 78,000 dead and wounded. The new numbers reference the book "Tannenberg 1914" by John Sweetman. I was wondering which numbers are correct? ChrisMKL (talk) 10:43, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Casualties

message: Could an editor here check the (very short) summary of this battle at World War I#Eastern Front and provide cites? Thank you.LeadSongDog come howl 20:35, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small request 

message: The infobox has a marker next to Samsonov saying he was killed in action. But the text (which I've been able to confirm in a book) says that he committed suicide. Is this correct practice for military figures? That if they kill themselves (in this case as a direct result of military failure) they are still classed as 'killed in action'? --bodnotbod (talk) 11:28, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, the crossmark is for people killed in action. Samsonov was not in combat when he died, and died by his own hand. Mediatech492 (talk) 21:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  We should probably change it then Benica11 (talk) 14:34, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Samsonov committed suicide but is marked as 'Killed In Action' is that OK? 

message: No figure is given for German prisoners taken. Does their large number of MIA (Missing in Action) indicate captives? Valetude (talk) 15:44, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  German prisoners?