Talk:Battle of Moscow

message: Today I edited German terms used in the middle of the article, after the relevant terms had already been introduced in English, and changed them to English. Specifically, in the section "Failed pincer move" (well into the article) Guderian is referred to as "Generaloberst" instead of the more common English word -- already used in the article -- "General"; and the 2nd Panzer Army is referred to as "Panzergruppe Zwei" (again, already referred to as "2nd Panzer Army" in the article, and besides, following the link to this unit's article shows it's called in English "2nd Panzer Army"). All of this was reverted by user Dennis for no good reason. It's my understanding in English Wikipedia we prefer to use English terms whenever they make sense; furthermore these English words were already in use in the article; and besides, why "Generaloberst" for Guderian while the Soviets are not referred to by their Russian-language ranks? The andf (talk) 20:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Guderian was no plain general, if you fix something do not introduce avoidable errors. --Denniss (talk) 20:50, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I never said he was a "plain" general, just that "Generaloberst" isn't an English-language rank, nor is "Panzergruppe Zwei" the English-language designation of his unit. Furthermore, "general Guderian" is mentioned several times before in the article, so I didn't "introduce" the rank. Are you going to object to the earlier mentions as well? The andf (talk) 23:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

text: There's no point in calling 2nd Panzer Army by any other name, since it matches the name of the related article. Guderian was colonel-general by that point, but for a lay reader it's a distinction without a difference. It's fine to call Guderian "General". --K.e.coffman (talk) 08:38, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random use of German terms in the article, without good reason 

message: Could someone look at rewording the third sentence of the fourth paragraph in the "Failed pincer" section? "The Germans were capable of seizing Venev and pushing towards storming formidably towards Kashira.
In the same paragraph, there is mention of the "SVT-41 semi-automatic battle rifle". I know of the SVT-40, with approximately 1.5 million produced, but can find nothing on an SVT-41.  --  Otr500 (talk) 09:31, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sentence structure 

message: ussr used power to 
attack german 2404:160:8154:5978:6D71:221C:1276:5A8D (talk) 14:33, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  last battle of moscow  

message: There's a paragraph that states:
"On 4 January, the skies cleared. The Luftwaffe was quickly reinforced, as Hitler hoped it would save the situation. «snip» It was a last minute effort and it worked. «snip» Between 17 and 22 December the Luftwaffe destroyed 299 motor vehicles and 23 tanks around Tula, hampering the Red Army's pursuit of the German Army"
That's not in chronological order and implies that reinforcements arriving on January 4th had something to do with actions in December. Can somebody please rewrite this in chronological order, so it is more clear what effect the January 4th reinforcements had? — SkyLined (talk) 07:11, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  timeline issues