Talk:Disarmed Enemy Forces

message: The purpose of the designation was to circumvent the 1929 Geneva Convention, Relative to the treatment of prisoners of war.
Well the thing which needs addressing is a simple - why?
What use is it to bring it up if you dont address the reason for said resignation?--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something which needs addressing 

message: # The article needs more material about its subject, which is DEF as a policy decision rather than its consequences.
# The table is nontopical. It appears to be WP:SOAPBOXing of the "they were worse" variety, and cites no source. It should be immediately deleted.
# There is too much factual assertion rather than attribution of claims. One example: "In total, the number of German POWs that died could not have exceeded 1% (56,000)" is asserted by Ambrose, but it is quoted as a fact.
# By contrast, it appears that someone has gone through and inserted "allegedly" and its synonyms at every possible opportunity into the opposing material. This perverts the intent of WP:UNDUE.
* Personal disclosure - my impression of Bacque is that he makes too many conclusions out of too little data. But neither my personal opinion nor anyone else's should be used as an excuse to take sides in a dispute. Wikipedia does not engage in disputes, it neutrally describes them. arimareiji (talk) 17:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third opinion 

message: I swear I'm not making this up, it ACTUALLY STATED "The Western Allies' post-war treatment of German prisoners was first investigated by Canadian novelist James Bacque, together with Ernest Fisher, Jr."
James Bacque the FIRST to investigate???  That was too silly not to save for posterity on the Talk page.  If you don't believe me, click on the history of this monstrosity. That was even nuttier than Bacque's "Missing Million" claim in Other Losses.
It also had huge 400px wide photos of the Rheinwiesenlager camps, which not only have ZERO to do with the DEF designations, but also contained thousands of prisoners designated POW, not DEF.
It also contained long descriptions of the total deaths' from Bacque's crazed book -- never mind that these were not only not all because of DEF designations, the subject of this article, but many of these prisoners weren't even DEF, they were French.
In short, it was pretty wacky.   It still needs some work, though the designation itself is a pretty narrow subject.  Mosedschurte (talk) 22:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is a complete joke

message: The statement "was to circumvent the 1929 Geneva Convention, Relative to the treatment of prisoners of war."  carries POV connotations for someone reading the introduction and who is not familiar with the term "Disarmed Enemy Forces" as it hints that the move was illegal. The lead should be read independently of the main body of the article and be a fair summary of the article. Such a statement is not a fair summary. --PBS (talk) 07:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  I changed the Lede to reflect this.  Also, I moved the addition of the 1949 amendment material regarding the 1929 GC to the aftermath section, with the other sentence addressing the issue.Mosedschurte (talk) 15:28, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  circumvent ion of the 1929 Geneva Convention 

message: I notice what, at a first quick reading, seems to be an inconsistency in the current presentation. 
The article now suggests that allegations that hundreds of thousands captured Germans died under allied hands is exaggerated. However, that doesn't seem to match the fact that 1'300'000 Germans went missing. Should we perhaps mention academic opinions that do provide a plausible accounting, or are we obliged to leave it to the readers to form their own opinion about the claimed "consensus" [citation missing!]? Harald88 (talk) 14:21, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbers don't match? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Disarmed Enemy Forces. 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/20071128061447/http://atvs.vg.no/player/?id=2887 to http://atvs.vg.no/player/?id=2887
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:17, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Disarmed Enemy Forces. 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/20081029014110/http://www.history.hqusareur.army.mil/Archives/First%20Year/the%20first%20year%202.pdf to http://www.history.hqusareur.army.mil/Archives/First%20Year/the%20first%20year%202.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:21, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified