Talk:Battles of Rzhev

message: Sorry for careless reverting. Mikkalai 20:44, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Says who?
if they want to censor history - that tells you it was not a great battle!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.31.3.195 (talk) 19:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "A reminder of these nameless and apparently futile battles" 

message: Propose to move this article to Rzhev-Vyazma strategic offensive operation, this being the name of the overall operations in the Belyi - Rzhev - Viazma salient. Actual battles will be dealt with under their five component operation articles, i.e. the 41st Army operations around Belyi, 21st Army operations around Gusevo, 39th Army around Molodoi Tud, 30th Army north of Rzhev, 31st Army in the Zubtsov area, 20th Army in the Tatarinka area, 29th Army in the Sychevka-Gzhatsk sector, and the 5th and 33rd Armies around Viazma.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 02:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  propose to move 

message: Can someone clarify this?
This article says in the introduction this was “a series of World War II offensives launched during January 8, 1942—March 22, 1942” and says the last was “:Rzhev offensive operation (Operation Mars) (03.03-20.04.42).”
But then in the "Rzhev-Sychevka Strategic Offensive Operation (Operation Mars)"
section it has	“The next Rzhev-Sychevka Offensive (25 November 1942 - 20 December 1942) codenamed Operation Mars".
Also, The Operation Mars page has “Operation Mars was the operation codename for the Rzhev offensive operation part of the Rzhev-Vyazma strategic offensive operation (08.01-20.04.42), but then says  “It took place between 25 November-20 December, 1942”.
Which is correct? Or are they referring to two operations by the same name? Xyl 54 (talk) 15:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operation Mars? 

message: Rzhev-Sychevka Offensive Operation currently links to Operation Büffel. Th elink text refers to a summer offensive in  1942 and the linked to page is a stub of the german with drwawl in 1943.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christwelfwww (talk • contribs) 22:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Inacurate link

message: The article claims that Stalin was personally in command of Operation Mars and the Rzhev front in 1942. That seems a bit much even for Wikipedia. 70.234.237.246 (talk) 09:04, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Russian Research after 1991 has generally concluded that Stalin was personally responsible for every setback and negative outcome in the war. Stalin makes mistakes. Soviet Generals never do. 12.12.144.130 (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stalin as a front commander at Rzhev? 

message: The history of this "operation" has been a long-running controversy. The German and Soviet histories are completely at odds with each other. The German sources say that "Operation Buffalo" was conducted according to a careful plan and experienced almost no meaningful interference by the Soviet side. The Soviet sources claim that it was a panic evacuation which occured simultaniously with a Soviet offensive and forced the German side to abandon all sorts of military equipment. 
I tend to really question if there ever was an operation which would qualify as an offensive. It seems as if the offensive was sort of retroactively invented. There was certainly an advance in the wake of the German pullout, but calling that an offensive seems incorrect. 70.234.244.78 (talk) 19:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that Wikipedia depends on secondary sources and mose of the secondary sources on the Soviet side are influenced by pre-1990 Soviet war history. After the war, the official soviet historians generated a mostly false but incredibly detailed spin-narrative of the war made up of constant "offensives". Any German withdrawal by choice is always presented in the Soviet sources as the result of an offensive. Its rather questionable if there is any controversy. The story presented in the Soviet sources just makes no sense at all. 12.12.144.130 (talk) 22:02, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  comments on the Third Rzhev–Sychevka Offensive Operation 

message: "By providing the data in the stored documents of Russian Ministry of Defence, Isayev stated that the "research" of Svetlana Aleksandrovna Gerasimova belongs to the type of "research on the high-heel shoes"."
This sentence is sexist abuse and should be deleted. Isayev's substantive attack is given in the following sentence ("The claimed of above journalist are also judgment of people without adequate knowledge of history, and are the results of demagogic motivation under the slogan "every information must be shown to the people".") Michael GF (talk) 19:49 AEST, 19 May 2013
did some copyedit elsewhere , the whole paragraph has me dumbfounded, that said somewhat revealing:) it is also nice isayev explains his motivations concerning the protocol around hero citys:)
I will hope it will come to my mind again some other day:)
62.163.114.47 (talk) 06:21, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: A review in the Journal of Slavic Military Studies described Gerasimova's work as 'impressive,' and 'well researched and effectively argued,' though noting it did show its origins as a PhD thesis.  Buckshot06 (talk) 07:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

text: In her book, she clearly states: The total casualties over approximately eight months of fighting (out of 15 months between the start and endpoint of the operations) amounts to 1,324,823 men, which is a higher number than the total Soviet losses in the Battle of Stalingrad. The irrecoverable losses over this time at the Rzhev salient comprised 433,037 men, in the Stalingrad battle – 478,741 men, which is also fully comparable. This figure comes from the book Rossiia i SSSR v voinakh XX veka: Statisticheskoe issledovanie [Russia and the USSR in the Wars of the XX Century: A statistical analysis]. Wildkatzen (talk) 11:52, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  She concludes: the human losses of the Red Army in the fighting at the Rzhev – Viaz’ma staging area might possibly even exceed 2,000,000 men (p.158) and list ultimately a loss of 2,300,000 men. (p.159) Wildkatzen (talk) 11:58, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualties of the Soviet forces 

message: The first paragraph had the Russian for "Battles of Rzhev" after the term "Rzhev Meat-Grinder," and mentioned the "meat grinder" term twice. I reworded it so that the Russian terms directly follow the English ones, and the reason why the battles were called the "Rzhev Meat-Grinder" was included in the first sentence. The result is a bit unwieldy, but does put the Russian terms in the right place. Roches (talk) 17:25, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reworded first paragraph 

message: The description of this battle as a "stalemate" is beyond weird. The Soviet accomplished none of their objectives in the face of massive losses. That is usually known (outside Wikipedia) as a defeat. 12.12.144.130 (talk) 21:43, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stalemate? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Battles of Rzhev. 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/20140811182349/http://graph.document.kremlin.ru/page.aspx?869039 to http://graph.document.kremlin.ru/page.aspx?869039
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) 00:18, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Battles of Rzhev. 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/20151228032412/http://ww2stats.com/cas_ger_okh_dec42.html to http://ww2stats.com/cas_ger_okh_dec42.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130525020822/http://ww2stats.com/cas_ger_okh_dec43.html to http://ww2stats.com/cas_ger_okh_dec43.html
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) 08:20, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: My rational to restore previous stable version diff was that the site actualhistory.ru looks like a personal homepage, with opinions on issues ranging from controversies, news, myths and even movies etc. The webpage also seem not be maintained since 2012. Probably defunct. Russian historian Svetlana Gerasimova has written extensively on the topic in her 2013 issued book "The Rzhev Slaughterhouse: The Red Army's Forgotten 15-Month Campaign Against Army Group Center, 1942-1943". She states that the 'commonly [German losses] cited 350,000 - 400,000 lack substantiation' and that Soviet archival records miss casualty entries for the months of May-July and October-November 1942, January-February 1943.
She therefore maintains that 2,300,000 men must have perished, captured or wounded. If necessary, I can provide the relevant book pages. Wildkatzen (talk) 20:10, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: After Meliodas Samas edit today, who('s) - apperently WP:WIKIHOUNDing me since the last article - does not seem to be aware, that four major offensive operations against the Rzhev-Viaz’ma salient were fought. Therefore the name of the article, Battles of Rzhev. However, in order to raise awareness I will provide a full-length quote of the aforementioned book below. Wildkatzen (talk) 14:49, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  July 2019 

message: I have protected the article for a week. Please settle you dispute on the talk page or on some dispute resolution boards rather than edit war. As an editor I think that if the sources contradict each other then we should present both versions unless one of the sources is completely unreliable Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:47, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected 

message: Russian historian Svetlana Gerasimova states in her 2013 issued book "The Rzhev Slaughterhouse: The Red Army's Forgotten 15-Month Campaign Against Army Group Center, 1942-1943" pp 167-9, that both sides failed to archive their ultimate operational objectives. Therefore, the result should be 'inconclusive' as per military infobox guidelines. Wildkatzen (talk) 12:43, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Result of the Battle 

message: 504,569 sanitary (?) on Russian side, what does that exactly mean ? wounded, ill ... ? we have no further explanations for half a million soldiers. 91.182.248.223 (talk) 12:07, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casualties 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:32, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I read much of the article and still don't have a big picture of who attacked whom, when and why, and what the results were, except for "January 8, 1942, and March 31, 1943",  in the introduction and, buried late in the article, the conclusion that the Germans withdrew from a salient.  The map gives little idea of the geography, such as why it was considered a German salient, and after reading I still have no idea.  The overall casualties for the Soviets and Germans are buried in the article (admittedly, they are speculative).  All this should be summarized in the introduction.  Then the article should have a more detailed overview; the "Overview" section is nothing but a list of names and links and is virtually useless as an overview.  Zaslav (talk) 05:07, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summary in introduction