User talk:MisterBee1966/Archive 1

Welcome![edit]

Howdy, MisterBee1966/Archive 1, Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions, you seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics! If you need help on how to title new articles see the naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. For general questions goto Wikipedia:Help or the FAQ, if you can't find your answer there check the Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. If you have any more questions after that, feel free to ask me directly on my user talk page.

Additional tips[edit]

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!

For Wikipedia policies and guidelines see The Five Pillars of Wikipedia and What Wikipedia is not.
Find everything in the Directory.
If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
Introduce yourself at the new user log.
If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random page button in the sidebar, or check out the Open Task message in the Community Portal.
If you have edits from before creating an account try this.
To Upload Images with the correct Copyright tags.
Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), this will automatically produce your name and the date.

Be Bold!![edit]

You can find me at my user page or talk page for any questions. Happy editing, and we'll see ya 'round.

Jo e I 22:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

On 14 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Erich Rudorffer, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Yomangani ^talk 18:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reference tags[edit]

Please use the correct style of reference tags when adding notes. The current standard is the <ref>Whatever</ref> style. Using the old and new styles together breaks the note numbering. Abel29a 19:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Military history WikiProject![edit]

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, peer review, and project-wide collaboration.
We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
Our requests page has extensive lists of requested articles, images, maps, and translations.
We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill Lokshin 14:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006[edit]

The December 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:05, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007[edit]

The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC) [reply]

WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 11:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Military History elections[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!

Delivered by grafikbot 14:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007[edit]

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 15:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

DYK[edit]

On 16 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Walther Dahl, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 16:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007[edit]

The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 19:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

German Cross[edit]

Are you sure that the German Cross is an Iron Cross? I know it is between the Iron Cross and the Knights Cross, but does it count as an Iron Cross itself so that "Recipients of the Iron Cross" would be the category in which someone with the German Cross would go in? I don't mean to question your history knowledge, I was just slightly confused on the same issue and was hoping you could clarify it for me :) SGGH 13:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To my knowledge the German Cross (silver and gold) was inaugurated on September 28,1941 and is legally linked to the Iron Cross and War Merit Cross. Meaning the recipient of the German Cross in gold had to have been awarded the Iron Cross 1st and 2nd class. The recipient of the German Cross in silver required the Iron Cross 1st class or the War Merit Cross 1st class. However this does not imply that a recipient of the Knight's Cross necessarily had to have been awarded the German Cross.MisterBee1966 14:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hans-Arnold Stahlschmidt[edit]

Hi

Thanks for putting in the picture . I am having trouble adding in pictures, how do you quickly put one in? Do you just get one of the 'net' or just scan one and then put it on? I want to put one in for the Neumann page but am unsure about copyright's (it's from a book). Dapi89 14:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List[edit]

Oops! You are, of course, entirely correct. The articles do refere to the same person; the usage or otherwise of the General's full name has obviously caused confusion. Both articles are reasonably accurate, and of course largely overlap. Would you like a merge or a delete?--Anthony.bradbury 10:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV (April 2007)[edit]

The April 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Hans Joachim Marseille[edit]

Hi,

I missed your comment of the 11 May, so appologies for the delay in replying. First the 46 kill claim is inaccurate. I have ammended this. Marseille's 50 th Kill fell on 22 Feb '42 and he was awarded the Knight's cross the same day. 50 kills was the bench mark at that particular time, there would have been no award for 46 kills (it seems rather odd your source picked 46 kills.) I must admitt I don't know were the 27th recipient came from, 416th is correct. I must have been thinking of something else! Well spotted.Dapi89 17:04, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info MB1966.

I'm still a little unsure about the 46 kill thing. Perhaps it was awarded in anticipation of him reaching 50. Wouldn't that mean 50 was still the target, therefore he would be receiving the award for 50. I think though its better to leave it as it is as we cover both possibilities. On a different note I see you have Wubbes book. I was going to buy this but got Kurowski's instead. Is it worth getting? I'm not sure if you have seen kurowski's and are able to make a comparison but I thought I'd ask. Kurowski's is great for info and pics but is a little heavy on the hero-worship style, it reads a little like propaganda. Dapi89 22:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay great. That's it then. I was looking for this book on the internet and could only find it on the German Amazon website. I don't mind it being in German, I can get by in it. Is there an english speaking website that you know of that I might be able to get a copy from? - To make the purchasing easier. You also mention your Grandfather in your last reply. If you don't mind me asking what he do during the war?

Thanks for the info.Dapi89 09:55, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Misterbee,

Thanks for taking the effort to write that lengthy reply. That sounds like a very eventful military career. My grandmother and grandfather guarded German and Italian prisoners during and after the war, he may have been one of them! My Great Uncle also saw action in the Desert Rats, which began my interest in the war. I don't Know many people that have family who saw action (or German people) and its interesting to see things from the other side. Dapi89 22:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some Dutch I know refer to it as Holland. 'Holland' is also used by the Dutch language itself, to mean the whole of the modern Netherlands. I got the impression that the edit was inferring that Leeuwarden had no connection to the the Netherlands. Sorry. Dapi89 18:59, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kill claims From the page:

Hello again. It is mentioned that they were questioned and in the book his kills were defended by not doubted by T&C- they mention other Historians had problems with these claims. Horrido (also by Raymond F. Toliver and Trevor J. Constable) was also reserached for years regarding accusations of false claiming by Hartmann and other Eastern Front Aces. In general the American and British Historians were highly suspicious about these large scores. They examined the German systems, their thoroughness and accuarcy, its mechanics and how it compared to the British and American systems. They proved it to be "far more precise and valid than the British and American systems". Having researched offical documents and coming across accounts of pilots like Hartmann withdrawing a claim because of lack of witnesses they still maintain his claims are still doubted.

On another note I'm really not a troublesome editor but I won't allow myself to be bullied or attacked in the way that User:Grant65 has done. I have not reverted any sourced material and I have supported his sourced inputs. Myself and other editors have tweaked these inputs but not deleted them. He seems to have it in form me, I just don't understand it.Dapi89 12:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm humbled! Yes please. I definitely feel I should compensate you for this. Perhaps you have a paypal account? I could split it 50/50? Having read my above post it seems I not have explained very well. It seems like I might be saying Raymond F. Toliver and Trevor J. Constable are doubting claims in the last line of the first paragraph. I meant that they were maintaining others doubted claims. T&C have both supported Hartmanns kill count. I personally support their conclusions. Dapi89 23:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent an e-mail as requested, but I receive a unable to deliver message minutes after dispatching it.Dapi89 16:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Luftwaffe during World War II[edit]

Hi again Mr B.

Noticed you edited some stuff on this article. It desperately needs expanding on some sections like the Luftwaffe in the East. Would you able to assist?Dapi89 19:12, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I agree with that. All that needs to be included, I did intend to include those topis - but I felt the 'basics' of the article needed cleaning up first. The Eastern front section needs adding to, for such an important aspect of the Luftwafe in world war 2 it should be one the lengthy sections. I thought about splitting it into sections, for example casualties and success/contributions throughout Barbarossa, and then throughout the various major battles like Stalingrad and Kursk with mention to decline problems logistics and weather, the nature of its inability to attack soviet industry and so on. I have plenty of info on fighter units and aces. But I think overall strategy and organisation pertaining to the support of the various Army groups wouldn't go amiss. Dapi89 20:25, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Did you get a chance to look for any Eastern front info? My library is a bit thin on the ground in this department. Are you going to start soon on the subjects you mentioned? RegardsDapi89 21:33, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)[edit]

The May 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 15:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC) [reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)[edit]

The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

List of German Jet aces in World war II[edit]

Thanks for the creation of this chart, Congratulations for it. Best regards, Miguel

Luftwaffe and the Holocaust[edit]

No problem about that, I'm sure your busy! Your right I did neglect Günther Lützow and credited only Molders, although the language does say he "developed" rather than created this tactic. I will change this when I can find a citation (as no doubt it may become a contested issue).

I have too say I had no idea Günther Lützow was approached by the SS. I don't recall it amongst the literature I have. I'm sure is true and if he did refuse it was sure brave to do so - thought as a war hero I doubt that he would have been in real trouble

With regard to the Luftwaffe and its role during the holocaust, I have no info on this. I was always sure that the Luftwaffe was the one branch of the military that was uninvolved. I believe the kriegsmarine shipped prisoners in the wake of the Soviet advance into the Baltic region in 1944-45 but am unaware of the Luftwaffe taking such a role. Dapi89 17:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Yes I will try and get hold of that title. Although, I personally, find it quite difficult and time consuming to aquire foreign books via the internet. If you have the relevant info perhaps you could put it on? I think as well some of the later sections like Luftwaffe Commanders and Field Divisions need revising - What do you honestly think of the article?Dapi89 21:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 03:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hermann Göring[edit]

I reverted your edit to Hermann Göring: There is no mention of the Knight's Cross elsewhere in the article, but the Iron Cross comes up several times. Is there something more to this that I am missing? —Emufarmers^(T/C) 10:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know little about either Göring or the Iron Cross, so I can't dispute anything you wrote. However, the article itself makes no mention of the Knight's Cross (at least not by that name), so you should add this fact (a source would be good) so that the category doesn't seem to come out of nowhere. —Emufarmers^(T/C) 10:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers against awards[edit]

Quick question re:numbers against awards as per the last edit you made to Heinrich Ehrler. Can I ask what this represents - I'm assuming this is the number of issue? Kernel Saunters 15:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Bf 109 Gustav RÃ¶del 2.JPG[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Bf 109 Gustav RÃ¶del 2.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 11:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Bf 109 Gustav Rödel 2.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Bf 109 Gustav Rödel 2.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Kirill 01:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)[edit]

The August 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC) [reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)[edit]

The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 10:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Marseille[edit]

I just noticed what you wrote on Dapi's page on 10 September, namely:

I also feel that the doubts about Marseille are wrong. But wrong because they are generic in nature and pertain to any Luftwaffe pilot or any other pilot from any other airforce. Putting these doubts on the Marseille or Hartmann page would discredit them as individuals. That's my personal problem with what is going on. I would feel a lot more comfortable with a generic Wiki article about "over claiming". Here we should list all potential cases of over claiming regardless of affiliation. Because I can point to a number of references where American pilots claimed more aircraft shot down than what was actually lost by the Germans. However I would not feel it correct for instance to put this on Hub Zemkes page.

We differ in philosophy here. I feel that any documented cases of serious overclaiming (whether on a particular day or over a whole career) against famous aces, of any nationality are important, and should be included. Last time I looked, we were doing this for Pierre Clostermann. I don't understand why you wouldn't include such material on Zemke's page.

Also, I would like to point out two issues about Kurowski's credibility identified by Russell Brown. As he says, Kurowski reports the claims of 15/09/42 without even questioning them, even though Shores & Ring (1969) reported the correct Allied losses on that particular day. Brown also points out that Kurowski denigrates the claiming/verification practices of the RAF/RAAF/SAAF, based apparently on what happened in the Battle of Britain, whereas the situation appears to have been quite different in North Africa and the RAF/RAAF/SAAF practices in North Africa now appear to have been more more stringent than the Luftwaffe in North Africa. Grant | Talk 23:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. What would you say to the suggestion that the material in the "Controversy" section of the Marseille article should be moved to the "North Africa". Apart from anything else, Wikipedia policy opposes sections that are one paragraph long.

BTW, Kurowski's remarks about Desert Air Force claims are difficult to understand, when you read the accounts by DAF pilots. For example, in Kristen Alexander's new biography of Clive Caldwell, it is suggested that he scored the P-40's first ever kill, an Italian bomber near Alexandria, but was not credited because no-one actually saw it hit the sea. Caldwell never included it in his tally. Similarly, Russell Brown quotes Bobby Gibbes regarding a Stuka, the wreck of which he visited near his own base, for which he was never credited, because no-one saw it hit the ground. Grant | Talk 10:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree about the need for an article regarding the various verification regimes.

You say: "I really feel that only if the pilot as an individual can be made accountable for over claiming should we make this an issue in the individual article..." Well, that is my point about Marseille; I have never seen him as like a Welter or Clostermann, but at the risk of becoming a bore, his individual claims of 15/9/42 were greater than the total DAF losses that day, and the claims by JG27 exceeded total Allied losses by 200%. I think that is significant, regardless of whether Marseille intended to overclaim or not. Grant | Talk 21:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in the case of Kageneck, Caldwell was never credited with the kill, so there is your answer .

I too am inclined to think it was the system rather than the pilots, with some exceptions. That is beside the point, becuase the same system created Marseille's reputation. Do you see what I mean? Grant | Talk 07:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Recipients of the Medaglia d'Argento al Valor Militare and Category:Recipients of the Medaglia d'oro al Valor Militare[edit]

The names of these new categories would surely be better in English, like the article Silver Medal of Military Valor? Fond though I am of the Italian language, it's obscure to most English speakers. Xn4 05:45, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mind if I move them to Recipients of the Silver Medal of Military Valor and Recipients of the Gold Medal of Military Valor ? Xn4 01:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heinrich Freiherr von Lüttwitz[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Heinrich Freiherr von Lüttwitz, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Smilo Freiherr von Lüttwitz. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 12:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)[edit]

The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 14:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Michael Possinger[edit]

All I can say about your work on the Michael Pössinger expansion that you did is WOW! Chris (talk) 23:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)[edit]

The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 02:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Gerhard von Schwerin.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Gerhard von Schwerin.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hans-Waldmann.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Hans-Waldmann.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marseille's file.[edit]

Morning Mr B and welcome to Sunday. Have you had a reply regarding Marseille's file? Regards, Dapi89 (talk) 02:09, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of interest Marseille's sister was killed sometime in December 1941, do you happen to know exactly what happened there? F.Kurowski's book suggests it was murder, is this accurate?Dapi89 (talk) 23:20, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its fine and you have put too much effort in to it! The translation is broken english; in that the words in sentences are back to front - but this is to be expected as it is a direct translation from German-English. Its easy enough to read.

I was aware of his bride to be, H. Kuppers (is the spelling correct?). I believe she was an actress (Marseille moved in those circles) and not a school teacher as depicted in the film. I don't believe this has ever been mentioned in the article.

I did raise the issue, regarding his decision not to fly back to Berlin with Rommel (I believe it was the Desert Fox, not Kesselring) on 28th Sept, on the talkpage with user: Mumby some time ago. It was to attend the Berliner sportsplatz with Rommel and listen to Hitler's speech on 30th Sept. I believe this should be mentioned, I'll add it. Do you know what happened to his partner?Dapi89 (talk) 00:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The artcile deserves more than a B-Class tag. It's satisfying to see the how the article has developed since the start of the year. In my opinion it should qualify for A-Class.Dapi89 (talk) 15:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I had come across this. I read it first on a internet page, but it did not have any credibility - I still don't believe it does. It seems inconsistent chronologically as Marseille returned to Africa in August 1942, I believe the Holocaust did not start in earnest until later that year. Also it seems highly unlikely Marseille would have been given access to this information, I don't recall him having close Gestapo or SS contacts, how else would he know I wonder? I have not come across any reliable source that can elaborate or confirm this. I personally have serious doubts about the truth of it allDapi89 (talk) 19:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

True. Still I believe you will have a hard job proving it. The material, I think, will just not be available. It's highly unlikely that Marseille himself or anyone close to him would have recorded this anywhere as that would carry obvious risks. Word of mouth of witness passed down from person to person is just too unreliable though I am sure Marseille would have reacted, given the type of character he was (a fan of Jazz, friendly with Mattheus his black South African friend) in that wayDapi89 (talk) 01:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I think you have made a slight mistake here, I made the following edit [1]. This was modified to [2] by user:Grant65! Not guilty!Dapi89 (talk) 22:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this in effect what I had amended it to. This I believe is a truthful reflection of the factsDapi89 (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, I have replied on that page to a number of things I found unfairDapi89 (talk) 14:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Question: Did Marseille destroy any aircraft in WK-Nr. 14256, his last machine, or fly any other missions? Weal suggests Marseille flew this machine on 26 Sept, and scored the seven kills of that day in it. But due to the information coming from an Osprey title a have concerns about its accuracy Dapi89 (talk) 00:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. That was it then? Oh well you tried. Dapi89 (talk) 18:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hartmann's P-51 Mustang kills[edit]

Mmm. This is a problem. I tend to believe that the German sources are more accurate when dealing with a "German" subject matter as materials are not distorted during translation. I corrected the information pertaining to his first action, as that implied he had shot down four P-51s, when it just two- of course his comrades nailed the other two. I would support your German sources in the article, and perhaps also adding a footnote would help, explaining the errors in the English literature.Dapi89 (talk) 12:46, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you happen to know what the timeframe was for these 4 kills in one mission? Dapi89 (talk) 14:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I meant the actual time, i.e 13:00 etc. Dapi89 (talk) 21:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hartmann[edit]

I have had a look at the article and put in some minor corrections. I think the article could do with expanding in the region of his training days and late war exploits. The Article is a litle bit thin around the Kursk period. Dapi89 (talk) 09:56, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Franz Schiess/Franz Schieß[edit]

Indeed. I felt it was better to use the English spelling given this is an English speaking website and people may not be able to understand the pronunciation. Still I see your point, I suppose this should be changed as it is the same format on the Goring page and others.

Unfortunately Oblt. was his last known rank in my literature. It would seem this was so at the time of his death. Perhaps he was promoted after his death, as seems to have been common in the Luftwaffe.Dapi89 (talk) 11:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helmet Woltersdorf[edit]

Hi Welcome to 2008! Recently I updated the Do 215 page survivor section. It concerned the only known intact Do 215 (and of any Dornier twin-engined variant) found recently off the Netherlands coast. The machine was flown by the above night-fighter ace, who was killed in the engagement. Do you have any information on him? All I have is peripheral information. I can tell you he died on the night of 6/7 July 1941 from return fire from a Wellington Bomber he was attacking, and his kill count stood at 22 at the time of his deathDapi89 (talk) 18:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Alfred Schumacher[edit]

Notability of Carl-Alfred Schumacher[edit]

A tag has been placed on Carl-Alfred Schumacher requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Monkeytheboy (talk) 21:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)[edit]

The December 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was me...[edit]

I guess I misunderstood what the sentence about Wübbe was trying to say. I trust your judgement and am happy to leave the matter in your hands. Regards, Grant | Talk 11:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That seems fine.

I haven't seen Wübbe's book. It would be interesting to know the extent of his research; i.e. to fully research RAAF and SAAF squadron records, he would have to travel to Australia and South Africa. I believe Russell Brown was the first to do this relation to the RAAF squadrons in the DAF and I'm not sure that anyone has done it for the SAAF ones. Grant | Talk 16:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Osprey Books[edit]

I have fallen into the trap of regarding them as accurate books. This is generally true and they "get the message" across. However there are numbers of small mistakes. Scutts refers to Marseille's last kill and engagement as the 28th September, when it was two days earlier, and I have learned not to trust translations of awards, ranks, or positions, as often the exact translation is incorrect this can be quite annoying even to the English speaking reader. I still habour some concerns about Franz Shiess final rank because of this, as Bf 109s In N.A and the Med. was the source used. There seems to be some consistency, in that the worst titles seem to be written be Jerry Scutts! I use his sources only when checking with others to try and increase the sources used on a particular article - or if I'm pressed for sources.

John Weals titles seem allot better and have some more detail in them. I have since ceased to buy the Osprey titles and only do so if there is a serious lack of literature on a particular title that one of these books might cover.

Speaking of which, I recently found some citation requests for the Bf 109 page regarding its combat in Swiss and Yugoslav service. I am still looking for some information for a claim made that a single engagement resulted in 12 German Bf 109s being shot down by Yugoslav 109s. Do you have any info on this? I have tried obtaining ISBN: 9780948817076, Air War for Yugoslavia, Greece and Crete, 1940-41, by ChristopherS hores, (1985) which I thought would been an interesting read and useful, but it is out of print nowDapi89 (talk) 17:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Yugoslavian Campaign[edit]

Unfortunately I cannot be certain. I have narrowed it down to JG 26 and JG 27 that I am sure served in the Campaign Dapi89 (talk) 13:56, 5 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

The text reads: "On 6 April, during Operation Punishment, 12 Yugoslav Bf 109s along with six other Yugoslav-made Icarus IK-3s downed 12 German Messerschmitts during the Battle of Yugoslavia". So it would imply it took place on a single day although,due to the wording, it could also be implying that it was during all eleven days of the fighting.Dapi89 (talk) 15:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hans-Joachim Marseille GA Review: On Hold[edit]

GA on hold — Notes left on talk page. Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Anton Hafner.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Anton Hafner.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bf 109 G-2[edit]

This, I believe, poses more questions than it answers! I was particularly interested to see if the 109 that Marseille was killed in had been in action before. If the text reads "the Gustav flown on 30 September 1942 was on its first mission that day", would imply that it had seen action before, as it was only on its first mission on that day. I suppose reading between the lines we can deduce it had been on other combat missions, and Marseille may have scored those kills in that machine. Interesting information though, at least it narrows it down. Dapi89 (talk) 00:10, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forget the above. I see that the 109 was on its very first mission on 30 September. Dapi89 (talk) 11:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question regarding Marseille's last kill. F.K's book indicates Marseille's 158th victim was killed, but in the article he is listed as having bailed out. Dapi89 (talk) 23:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the the way, congratulations on the G.A rating. I think you deserve the "Lions share" of the credit. Dapi89 (talk) 23:33, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see. I wonder if the name of the 158th victim is known to Wubbe? Dapi89 (talk) 20:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a pain. Perhaps they are withholding information. Dapi89 (talk) 15:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USAAF 57th FG[edit]

Please see Talk:Hans-Joachim_Marseille#USAAF. Wübbe's claims regarding "Lt MacMarrel" and/or the 57th Fighter Group seem dubious. The earliest date I have found for operations by the 57th FG is October 7, 1942. It is possible that individual USAAF personnel were attached to Commonwealth squadrons at earlier dates, but that needs to be clarified. Grant | Talk 16:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Award[edit]

Thanks. I'm not an admin so I don not have the power to award you anything. I must clean up that article and put more explanation in - the why opposed to the when! Dapi89 (talk) 17:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Recently I tried to quit wiki by having my page deleted (so as not to destroy my studies), however this seems to have failed! The problem is I have lost the wkikcheverons you awarded, is there anyway of getting these back? Dapi89 (talk) 11:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of the I Corps (Germany)[edit]

Thank you for that. --mrg3105 mrg3105 13:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)[edit]

The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator elections[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Kirill 18:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LOTD[edit]

Congratulations on your recent WP:FL promotion. You may be interested in participating the the selection of lists of the day and a list of the month for March or nominating lists for April.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 18:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist coordinators election has started[edit]

The February 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fifteen candidates. Please vote here by February 28! --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 18:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of foreign recipients of the Knight's Cross[edit]

Hey MisterBee, I'll be onto it soon, I'm a touch busy in reality for the next few hours but I'll certainly give you an update as soon as I can. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My very last round of comments await you! The Rambling Man (talk) 15:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Viktor Bauer[edit]

I don't believe the copyright issues with Viktor Bauer have been resolved. Your edits have provided a lot of valuable organization, tabulation, and categorization, but the text remains in large part a word for word copy of Aces of the Luftwaffe I have created a /Temp page to rewrite the article as the offending page history will need to be deleted. Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 03:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to follow this thread here User_talk:Dapi89#Copyvios, where we're discussing the proper way to handle these.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 21:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Harry von Bülow-Bothkamp.gif)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Harry von Bülow-Bothkamp.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thank you[edit]

		Milhist Coordinator elections
		Thank you very much for your support in the recent Military history Wikiproject elections. I went into it expecting to just keep my seat and was astonished to end up with the lead role. I anticipate a rather busy six months :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 13:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply] Haut-Koeningsbourg castle, Alsace.

Marseille's kill no. 17[edit]

Hi, regarding Marseille's kill no. 17: I believe it was you who added that it was "Flight Lieutenant Byers" of No. 451 Squadron RAAF in Hurricane I V7775 and that Byers became a prisoner of war. I'm guessing that the source was Kurowski and/or Wübbe(?) Do they say what the original source was?

There are two problems here: (1) while 451 Sqn was flying Hurricanes and V7775 is in the right range, there is no reference to a Byers (or Byres, Biers, Beers etc) in any of the sources on 451 Sqn, Russell Brown's book or RAAF personnel records; (2) while it is possible that he was an RAF/RNZAF/RCAF pilot, there is no record of a "Byers" or similar name among Commonwealth POWs. There was a F/O G. W. H. Byres, but he was part of a 51 Sqn RAF bomber crew in western Europe. I haven't been able to establish the names of any pilots for V7775. Regards, Grant 05:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further to that, http://www.adf-serials.com/, which is an excellent resource on the history of individual RAAF aircraft, lists a total of 10 Mk I Hurricanes assigned to 451 Sqn, including V7772 and V7779, but not V7775. Something is badly wrong here. What if we take out the details and leave it as "Hurricane near Bardia"? Regards, Grant 12:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed a footnote in the RAAF official history (Herington, 1954) to the effect that a 451 Sqn Hurricane, which was flying to Tobruk as it had been detached there for air defence duties, was shot down on or about September 13. Herington says the relevant records are incomplete, and it appears that the pilot and serial number were unknown to him. Not quite good enough to reinstate the details about Byers/V7775, but Wübbe's integrity may be intact after all. I'm guessing that his source in this instance was a private German record of some kind (logbook, diary etc). PS It seems there are omissions in the POW records also, such as those repatriated prior to May 1945. Regards, Grant 07:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

451 was a tactical reconnaissance squadron at the time, which is probably why Kurowski says that. However, Herington indicates that this was not a tac-r sortie.

For what it's worth, 451 had a fairly unfortunate history, including a power struggle between RAAF HQ in Australia and British DAF commanders, long periods in rear areas and a personnel which had the usual mix of Commonwealth nationalities and was constantly in flux. It is under-researched as a result. Grant (talk) 09:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hans Götz[edit]

Yo, you posted what looked like a sandbox article to Hans Götz/Temp. As Hans Götz already has content, I moved your article to your userspace here. The Hans Götz article is likely to be deleted soon for copyright infringement, so hopefully you can move your article there soon. Regards, скоморохъ 16:39, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey MisterBee, I noticed you did this with Herbert Bachnick/Temp too. You can't do that, subpages are not allowed in the mainspace. I created the new article at Talk:Herbert Bachnick/Temp because that's what the instructions at WP:CV say to do; and article talk space doesn't have a strict prohibition on subpages. If you create them as subpages of the talk pages the deleting admin will replace the copyvio article with the Temp article. I'm going to move the article back, but I'd be more than happy to discuss this procedure with you. Thanks.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 02:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- As mentioned, I restored the Talk space /Temp article and tagged the mainspace /Temp article for speedy deletion for the reasons stated above. I suggest you move the Hanz Gotz article to ~~Talk:Hanz Götz/Temp,~~ ~~Talk:Hanz Göts/Temp,~~ Talk:Hans Götz/Temp, but since Skomorokh put it in your userspace I'll let you deal with that.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 04:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hans Götz (moved from User talk:Doug)[edit]

Hi, I am not sure how to handle this correctly? Is the correct location Talk:Hans Götz/Temp? I am asking this because that's where I had originally put the Günther Specht article in replacement of the copy violation article and then it was moved. MisterBee1966 (talk) 13:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That explains it. I've posted a comment here: User_talk:Dapi89#Talkspace.2FTemps_vs_mainspace.2FTemps, explaining this further. I think Dapi misunderstood my earlier comments to him on this matter. I've also restored the Talk:Günther Specht/Temp, as that is the correct place, per the instructions at WP:CV. Thanks.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 16:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see, I'll explain what was going on to User:Skomorokh, who made this move. That editor is probably not familiar with WP:CV procedures. I'm a little confused though, this user says he or she was moving the mainspace subpage, but actually seems to have moved the Talk page subpage, the mainspace subpage is still there and shouldn't be. I will refer Skomorokh here for this discussion and I'll make the required moves (but I can't make the required deletions, I'll WP:CSD those).--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 16:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doug is correct in that I was unfamiliar with WP:CV procedure. I usually move salvagable content that is for whatever reason inappropriate for article namespace in its current state to the creator's userspace. What I think we need to do is find an administrator with access to Hans Götz, get them to delete the existing article (while retaining the url of the coprighted source for later use), and move MisterBee's version to the namespace. скоморохъ 16:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)*OK, this is a mess. Yes, the correct location for the clean article is at Talk:Hans Götz/Temp per WP:CV. But I can't move it there because there are so many moves and redirects in the page history, we need an admin to do it. The article appears to be currently residing at Hans Götz/Temp, even though it was apparently moved at one point to your userspace. I suggest you use {{db-user}} to have the various redirects in your userspace deleted. I'll see if I can get someone to fix this.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 17:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of what needs to be done to fix this[edit]

(keeping this here so the discussion stays together. I'm directing an admin here).
1. Move Hans Götz/Temp to Talk:Hans Götz/Temp over the redirect and delete the former. DoneMisterBee1966 (talk) 16:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2. Delete any cross-namespace redirects at User:MisterBee1966/Hans Götz/Temp and User talk:MisterBee1966/Hans Götz/Temp.posted {{db-user}} on the pages MisterBee1966 (talk) 16:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
3. Eventually, delete Hans Götz and replace with Talk:Hans Götz/Temp (important that all history at the target is deleted) and update Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2008_February_23/Articles.

Obviously this can be done more efficiently by combining steps 1 and 3 but there's a lot of other copyvio work to be done too and the important thing is to get this /Temp article into the right place for /Temp articles.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 16:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Six listed references are listed in the old article here. Which references need to be kept? Also, regretably, I am in way over my head here, having done no article deletions myself yet. I'm calling in someone who probably has more knowledge of the subject. John Carter (talk) 16:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The best option is probably to simply delete the old article. If User:MisterBee1966 or User:Dapi89 want to salvage any of the references, that's fine. When I create the new clean copies, I try to copy the references and categories over to save time, since I don't think the inclusion of those is itself subject to copyright. However, I'm pretty cautious, and expect the subject matter editors to add in new copyright compliant material. Creating the clean article is really not a requirement, I do it to try to help preserve articles that I can see deserve to exist but are clear copyvios. It looks like, though it's now hard to tell, that MisterBee created the clean copy for this one, so I would assume that he has already preserved whatever references he felt were relevant. I can update WP:CV for you when it's all done, if that helps at all. Thanks John. --Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 18:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, for John and others not familiar, all of the involved editors seem to be well aware of www.luftwaffe.com and have concerns about it's reliability. It should not be referenced on the final article unless one of the subject matter experts (e.g. MisterBee or Dapi) puts it there. Another editor has created a large number of pages based solely off of luftwaffe.com which has caused a pile of German ace copyvios. I'm trying to work the technical - create a new article here, blank the old one, updated WP:CV, etc. - side with the expectation that these two editors will fix the subject matter.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 19:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've fixed all this - the copyvio article has been deleted, the clean version moved to mainspace, the redirect deleted and the entry at WP:CV modified accordingly. I see MisterBee "moved" the article by copying and pasting the content. This should really be done using the move button (though it doesn't matter here because he was the sole author of the article). I can still see the deleted version, so if anyone wants the references retrieving let me (or any other admin) know. Hut 8.5 20:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Thanks. I think we're all set now (unless you want to take care of some more copy overs at WP:CV). :-)--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone for fixing this! Sorry for the trouble I have helped with. MisterBee1966 (talk) 22:03, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JG 27 losses 1/1/45[edit]

Hi.

Unfortunately I cannot answer this at the moment as I do not have my sources to hand. Could I hold fire on this until the weekend? The book I have been using thus far does provide an exact list of direct losses to the mission (as per the JG 11 table). I am sure this will yield answers. Dapi89 (talk) 22:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As luck would have it I passed a book store today and it had Manrho and Pütz's book in there (I do own a copy but it is at home). This work contains all Allied and German losses as a result of the 1 January attack. All the German units are listed. JG 27 losses that were 16 fighters destroyed as a direct result of the offensive. 15 of the pilots were killed, taken prisoner, or were missing. The 16th pilot made a crash-landing in German territory and survived. Tomorrow, if you like, I could scan and send you the lists which arew considerably detailed (there are about 6 or 7 full pages). Dapi89 (talk) 15:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little confused by your last reply. Indeed it was meant to confirm what you said was correct, losses were 15 pilots not 18. I can perhaps add a little more detail as and when. Dapi89 (talk) 17:37, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of scanning them I have put the info on the page, essentially filling in the blanks. Dapi89 (talk) 16:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)[edit]

The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marseille and the mysterious fractured arm[edit]

Kurowski points out Marseille had fractured his arm after the 15 September mission in a belly landing, could this mean he was shot down I wonder? What do you think? Dapi89 (talk

It was 1942! September to be precise. I have put it in the article, so the page number of Kurowski assertion can be seen. Dapi89 (talk) 11:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wehrmachtsbericht or Wehrmachtbericht[edit]

Hi. Recently I reverted Dodo19s edits on the above on the basis that you entered them and were a native German speaker. It appears perhaps this is not correct. Where you aware of this? Please see our conversation here. Dapi89 (talk) 10:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One or Two Missions[edit]

I agree it was almost certainly not in a single mission, but not for quite the same reason. It was possible Marseille's '109 carried a drop tank. However he would have had to jettison the tank before engaging his first opponent. This makes it impossible for him to have been in the air for another 1.5 hours to shootdown a second victim. Dapi89 (talk) 21:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bismarck[edit]

Well the problem is there are a lot of editors who are generally sensitive when it comes to accreditation during conflict. British naval militarists like to claim credit for Bismarck, as its quite a coup to have one of the most famous and powerful battleships of all-time on their kill-list. They will argue to the hilt the Royal Navy sank her. The American expedition to Bismarck revealed that the Hull had not been pierced severely (in fact just once above the water line by HMS Rodney). This causes a tremendous amount of annoyance to those who like to "claim her", because this gives rise to the notion that Bismarck robbed the British of a true victory. Inspite of all the overwhelming advantages (during the last battle) the British could still not sink her. This is ultimatley what causes embarrassment to British editors in particular. Having read Dr Robert Ballard's "Bismarck" it appears the ship was scuttled. The arguement is important, and for the credibility of wikipedia it must be technically accurate. I share your opinion about the British being the indirect cause of the sinking - I would say the Fairey Swordfish attack was the most significant aspect of this. I would say there are two parts: one, the British created the circumstances whereby the Bismarck was unable to escape; two: the Germans scuttled her. I really can't understand why there is so much reverting over that point. The article adequately explains all. Do you have an answer to my Hartmann question? Dapi89 (talk) 16:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did this make sense? Dapi89 (talk) 00:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation in Günther Schack[edit]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Günther Schack, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Günther Schack is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Günther Schack, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 17:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Günther Schack.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Günther Schack.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred Heckmann[edit]

I addressed the copy vio of Alfred Heckmann in this edit, please let me know if you see a problem. Jeepday (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adalbert Schneider[edit]

The article says it was posthumously awarded. But there are sources that say he was celebrating this with the senior officers on 27 May. I believe it was awarded before his death, as he and the senior officers knew about it. The recommendation was signaled to HQ at 2:21 hrs, and was approved at 03:51 on 27 May. Dapi89 (talk) 21:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Knight's Cross[edit]

On the articles page it said it was last awarded on 11 May 1945, three days after the end of the war. How can this be? Dapi89 (talk) 02:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)[edit]

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio concerns by another admin[edit]

Could you or User:Dapi89 take a look at the conversation I have been having at User_talk:Nick#Deletion_of_copyvios, Nick is concerned about one quote in particular in the article on Günther Specht. Thanks.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 00:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marseille[edit]

No problem, thanks. Grant | Talk 02:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Heinrich Trettner[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Heinrich Trettner, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heinrich Trettner. Thank you. GreenJoe 20:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Walter Bradel[edit]

If Geschwaderkommodore makes him notable, so be it, but reading the article I don't see that he did anything notable enough to be notable, other than reaching this rank and getting a relatively common orders. Do we have a list of military ranks with a note which rank makes the bearer notable? Same for orders and such? Perhaps it is something to be raised on WP:MILHIST.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:40, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jet aces[edit]

Judging by your work here, it looks like you've got pretty good sources, so let me ask: how many aces were there in Me-163 & He-162? Any? If you've got the info, can you include type of aircraft in the table? And, for my own interest (& not because I disbelieve you :) ), what's your source? Trekphiler (talk)

Yeah, that's what I thought. I've never heard of a kill scored by either, honestly. Thanx. ~~(I do still want the name of your sources, tho. I can't resist a good reference. =])~~ Trekphiler (talk) 14:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC) (OK, I should look at the links, first. 8[ 14:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Looking at the references here, I'd have found it eventually. Thanx for being patient. BTW, nice work adding pages. Have you seen this? Or this?

This user is a member at plane.spottingworld

Trekphiler (talk) 14:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to do it. If you're coming over to PSW, it's just like WP, just all-aviation. Any help cutting & pasting articles from WP is appreciated, too, just add a {{From Wikipedia}} tag at the bottom of the page (I put it in before I paste in), & I try to del links that don't apply to aviation after I paste but before saving. (I also include missiles & air-related movies & such, like "Airwolf" or "Blue Thunder", & I've gotten no complaints.) Anybody else you know of might be interested, send 'em over! Tell 'em Ghostrider2 sent you (my "call" over there). Ciao. Trekphiler (talk) 14:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By now you probably know I don't read as carefully as I might. 8[ I'll post it here (the main reason I wanted it). Trekphiler (talk) 15:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The smiley's nice. The good source is better. And I can't find a "smiley" for embarrassed. Keep up the good work. Trekphiler (talk) 15:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)[edit]

The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hartmann[edit]

So you recon that Harmann was innocent and spent 10 years in the camps for nothing? I'll try to get that German work that you recon absolves him of any crimes.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 11:02, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCookie[edit]

Re:Erich Hartmann[edit]

Oops, looks like I forgot! Anyway, it's done now. Cheers, --Eurocopter (talk) 13:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jet aces images[edit]

Hi there, see Image:Kurt welter.jpg where I have added in the fair-use templates for both articles and structured the page. Use that as a template and you should be fine. Regards. Woody (talk) 09:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-05-08 Curtiss P-40[edit]

Hi, I've volunteered to mediate at P-40. You've made comments at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-05-08 Curtiss P-40 but are not listed as a party to the dispute. Should you be listed? Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 12:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome and thanks for your help so far. --Kevin Murray (talk) 21:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brown/Marseille[edit]

I don't own a copy of Brown's book. When I get a chance I will go back to my local reference library and look at Brown's appendix on overclaiming again. That may not be for a few weeks. Grant | Talk 15:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, yes. Grant | Talk 15:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marseille[edit]

I am affraid not. I found this once :[www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-11725-p-2.html] but I am not sure. Dapi89 (talk) 23:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I had raised this on the same archive page as well. I can confirm(ish) only in favour of Brown. See here: http://www.geocities.com/raf_112_sqdn2/57thfghonor_roll42-43.htm. Dapi89 (talk) 00:39, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have contacted the USAAF Archives Division. I hope they will be able to help. Dapi89 (talk) 10:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have received a reply. The USAAF say that their records, or as they put it, "the official history", does not list any U.S pilots or aircraft of the 57th FG lost on 15 September 1942. They say that combat operations began on 12 August, but from that date to 15 September not one loss were reported. Dapi89 (talk) 14:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, they also say that between these dates 158 missions of a combat nature were flown including several fighter sweeps, but mostly bomber scort missions. Dapi89 (talk) 16:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and make fixes where you think there are mistakes. Dapi89 (talk) 16:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves[edit]

I've done them all except Alfred Heckmann as there is already an article there that another admin doesn't think is a copyvio. (I will investigate this one further.) Hut 8.5 08:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Herbert Bareuther[edit]

Hi, thanks for the message. I have removed the mention of Knight's Cross from the article Herbert Bareuther. So if Knight's Cross is out, then he is the recipient of Ehrenpokal der Luftwaffe and Deutsches Kreuz. However his stat is 55 aircraft. Also can you please use the book Walther-Peer Fellgiebel (2000), Die Träger des Ritterkreuzes des Eisernen Kreuzes 1939-1945 as reference for the Awards section in the article Franz Barten for his Knight's Cross? It will increase the number of references. I do not have the copy. Thanks. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 16:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You listed several names in the article List of World War II aces from Germany. Some of them has low stat like 7 aircraft, 11 aircraft etc. Do you think all of them meet WP:BIO? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 16:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 57th Wing[edit]

I appologize for taking so long to get back to you. I'm sorry, I don't have any insight to share on where beyond the source cited in the List of World War II aces from the United States. Best of luck with your search! Ndunruh (talk) 16:06, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just came across this site: [3]. Hopfully it can help with your research. If the site itself does not have any information you may be able to get some leads through the 'contact us' link at the bottom left of the page, or by contacting the Nellis AFB Public Affairs Office at [email protected] hope this helps. Ndunruh (talk) 13:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of German World War II jet aces[edit]

Very nice list. I've asked a couple of questions at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of German World War II jet aces. The list has been nominated for quite some time, so I'm trying to get this, and many others closed over the weekend. If you can, please take some time to review some of the lists in the orange "overtime box" at WP:FLC. Regards, Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 21:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt Tanzer[edit]

Hi, do you have a good reference where the exact stat of Tanzer is mentioned. The reference I used does not mention the exact stat, it states more than 128 enemy aircraft. Somewhere I saw his stat is nearly 145, but I cannot find the book where it is mentioned. If you have any book which clearly states his stat, please mention it in the article. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 06:14, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)[edit]

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brown[edit]

Yes it is a good book. So you managed to find a copy? I believe it is now quite expensive, even here in Australia. Grant | Talk 01:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw your post at mediation. That is interesting about the inaccurate No. 239 Wing claims on 15/9/42. I don't remember seeing anything about that in Brown, so I presume you are comparing Brown to another source(?) Also, does Brown actually state that the 57th Wing pilots were flying the own P-40F with 239 Wing? I did look for this in his book and could not conform it it. I think it unlikely, given that the F-variant used the Packard Merlin engine, which would have presented some problems for units equipped for and used to dealing with Allisons. Grant | Talk 02:15, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree about the "fog of war", although it seems to me that there is a big difference between five kills = 19 claims and zero kills = four claims. Perhaps this is my national bias showing :-) There is also the matter of what was accepted as confirmation, such as Brown's comment about the Panzer commander and the cloud of dust, although I'm not in a position to assess Brown's source for such remarks. Regards, Grant | Talk 07:42, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Günther Schack[edit]

Hallo, MisterBee, Guten Abend,

thank you for having "reanimated" the article about my uncle Günther Schack.

Tried to transfer the text about his life from the German Wiki to English (without copyright violation, because it is my own text), but my English is not so good. Perhaps you can pimp it up and then insert it?????

Thank you in advance Best regards --88.72.6.8 (talk) 21:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC) (in German Wiki: Reichensee)[reply]

==Life==

Guenther Schack was born in Bartenstein, a small town in Eastern Prussia, on November 12th 1917 as the son of Dr. Willy Schack and his wife, Dorothea, born Nietzki. He studied at the Technical Universities of Stuttgart and Aachen. In 1937, when he first tried to join the Luftwaffe, he was categorised as “wehruntauglich” (ineligible for military service) because of a sports injury in his early life. But after a new application as a volunteer he was accepted and joined the German Air Force (Luftwafffe at September 2nd 1939. After training for fighter pilot he met the 7th flying squadron of the Jagdgeschwader 51 with the service grad of a private/lance corporal. His first victory in aerial combat, he won on July 23rd 1941 at the eastern front (“Ostfront”). Meanwhile, he was promoted to the rank of a sergeant. After his 48th air victory, he was ordered back to Germany to serve as a flight instructor and was there promoted to lieutenant on January 1st 1943. In Mid-1943 he returned back to the eastern front and now served in the 9th flying squadron of the Jagdgeschwader 51. On September 3rd 1943 he could mark up his 100th Air victory and on December 8th 1943 he became chief of the 9th flying squadron. On July 1st 1944 Schack got his promotion to captain (Hauptmann). In December 1944 he advanced to commander of the 1st Group and after its dissolution at May 1st 1945 he was named commander of the 4th Group of the Jagdgeschwader 3. By the end of the war, he had scored 174 victories in 780 aerial combats and was shot down 15 times.

After the war Günther Schack worked as a sales manager in the manufacturing company of his uncle. In 1968 he resign from his job, left his wife and his three children and begun a new life in a isolated cottage in the mountain area Eifel where he lived as a vegetarian cultivating his own vegetables. During this time, he tried to deal with his traumata of the war and to develop and propagate his own philosophy of life: the “Homokratie”

German points system[edit]

Yes, I think so. But I would not make a big deal about it, as it does not exactly fit "overclaiming" and "confirmation" of aerial victories. But to dispel the myth, I would mention it. Dapi89 (talk) 18:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marseille[edit]

Guten tag. I have notice a new book on Marsellie and his aircraft, perhaps this might give some information on that last machine. Dapi89 (talk) 10:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation - are we done?[edit]

You have been involved in mediation at: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-05-08 Curtiss P-40. Discussion has subsided, and I think that the concerns have been resolved by removing the contested issues around over claiming to an article about that subject. Is there any need to continue or should we close this process? Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 15:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to Ndunruh[edit]

I went to his talk page to thank him for a cookie and saw your query. Off the top of my head I can't advise you on losses (but I will search my sources), but for aerial victories this is the definitive source (large PDF file): USAF Historical Study No. 85

The book is divided into Alphabetical (1st Section), Alphabetical by theater, Chronologically, and by Units (squadrons and group HQs). Ergo, scroll to the back and look up 57th Group Hq, and 64th, 65th, and 66th Fighter Squadrons. Every kill is enumerated by date, number credited on that date, pilot, his rank, and service number. btw, for the 57th its: Grp HQ 1.0; 64th 44.75; 65th 47.75; and 66th 60; grand total 153.5. Hope this helps.--Reedmalloy (talk) 04:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some quick research turned up these:

web-birds, 57th FG, see "Claims"
Missing Air Crew Reports (MACR) for KIA-POW

The second doesn't speak to all plane losses, but does allow you to access the original report for details of the missing and killed. Note that the 57th FG.org site includes personnel rosters for all squadrons. Its history page indicates some combat was flown by 57th pilots beginning Aug 9, 1942, with the first pilot "casualty" Aug 12, 1942 (all these were individuals flying temporary duty with RAF squadrons as partof their in-theater training). If I have the object of your research correct, there was a Lt. Mac McMarrell in the 64th FS.--Reedmalloy (talk) 04:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)[edit]

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:38, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Günther Lütjens[edit]

Yes, it is all tue, it is in Ballard's book, and on the English Bismarck article. I'll add this stuff. Dapi89 (talk) 15:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We will never know for sure, it is a bit like Chinese whispers in that sense. Dapi89 (talk) 16:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fw 190[edit]

I see you have added to the bib' on the Fw 190 page. Do you reckon you could add some on the mock combat between Evans and a pilot called Lang? I believe the Typhoon/Tempest match-up was a draw. Dapi89 (talk) 11:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. There is no harm in adding it there. People will not automatically know who those pilots were, so it would be good to have on the '190 page. Dapi89 (talk) 12:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. The article is better for it. Dapi89 (talk) 15:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Siegfried von Forstner[edit]

Thank you for noticing and correcting my error on the Ritterkreuz. Thewellman (talk) 16:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blair and Waters agree U-402 was destroyed by 2 TBF Avenger bombers from USS Card (CV-11) on 13 October 1943. The date and method of destruction is confirmed by Robert J. Cressman in The Official Chronology of the U. S. Navy in World War II. Blair specifies the boat was destroyed with all hands. Blair and Waters agree the TBF finding the boat carried the Mark 24 homing torpedo and U-402 stayed on the surface until a second TBF arrived. I believe Mark 24 doctrine at the time limited use of the Mark 24 to submerged boats to avoid surfaced observations of the delivery and homing procedure which might be reported by surviving U-boat crews. Waters states the first TBF fired machine-guns to encourage U-402 to submerge, and U-402 fired back. I assume Forstner might have been wounded by TBF machine-gun fire. Blair and Waters agree the Mark 24 torpedo was dropped after U-402 submerged. Waters reports a violent underwater explosion followed by observation of an oil slick and two floating cylinders (torpedo cannisters?) I assume the TBFs stayed around to observe the results and did not observe any survivors. The aircraft could not have picked up survivors, and I found no mention of surface ships even looking for survivors. I assume Forstner's survival would have required rescue by another U-boat assuming U-402 could have surfaced after the TBFs left. I assume the TBFs would have observed a wounded Forstner left on the surface when U-402 submerged. I found nothing in United States accounts of the sinking to support Forstner's death at some later date. Thewellman (talk) 07:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm uncertain of the origin and explanation for the later death date, but Waters book, Bloody Winter indicates he interviewed Forstner's wife Annamaria after the war. It seems strange she would have been unaware of the JANAC conclusions based on German U-boat records retained and transferred to the allies by Dönitz. I suppose someone might have wanted to spare her knowledge of an alternative death if it involved pain and suffering. Thewellman (talk) 20:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to chip in: If it's any help, both Kemp and Niestle echo Blairs account of U-402’s destruction, on 13 Oct, and say there were no survivors.

And if it sheds any light on the matter, they both have another von Forstner, Wolfgang –Freidrich, who skippered U-472. She was destroyed in March 1944 in the Arctic, but that Forstner and more than half his crew survived.

Source of confusion? Xyl 54 (talk) 14:48, 5 August 2008 (UTC), (repeated atThewellman (talk)[reply]

Thank you for the concise, yet well-balanced, description and potential explanation of the ambiguity among references on the talk page for this article. Well done. Thewellman (talk) 21:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)[edit]

The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Erich Hartmann CE[edit]

I'll make a start tomorrow. Unfortunately I don't think we'll make enough headway to influence the current FAC, and as I said, there's no guarantee that a better copyeditor won't still object on prose grounds in any future FAC, but it will get you heading in the right direction. --FactotEm (talk) 22:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I would not have guessed from the aticle that English is not your first language. You've done well. --FactotEm (talk) 22:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've completed a CE of the Early life section and the first part of the Military career section. Perhaps you could take a look and let me know if you're happy with the changes? --FactotEm (talk) 11:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I've got to get on with other things now, but I'll keep popping back every now and then and continue the CE. Maybe be able to complete it by next Tuesday, possibly before. --FactotEm (talk) 13:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lehrgeschwader[edit]

Correct. Dapi89 (talk) 12:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC) Yes.[reply]

I was awaiting yor reply to see what you thought about it (I thought you might). For the mo' I think integration is prudent, as another article will overcomplicate things. Dapi89 (talk) 13:13, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Ellenis, sunk in Piraeus harbour on 20 April. Dapi89 (talk) 17:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My source does not name the pilot. It does say that the only recorded ship sunk in that harbour was the Ellenis hospital ship (later refloated), on 20 April. It has to have been him, but I can't cite it. Dapi89 (talk) 13:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it could be said, "almost certainly" it was Helbig? The only recorded ship sunk in that port was the Ellenis, and it was by LG 1. Dapi89 (talk) 13:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:JG 71 Cuffband.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:JG 71 Cuffband.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Werner Mölders[edit]

Yes, but I think they were faked. Like the Marseille rumour, I think this is unproveable. It would be nice to think this was true, and it was Werner, but I think this was done so to soften the blow to Mölders reputation (having fought for the Nazis).

Hartmann[edit]

Yes, I would not bother in future. Dapi89 (talk) 16:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to answer a few things, but I don't think they will accept it. Dapi89 (talk) 17:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Luftwaffe Air Units

I'm new at this wikipedia user stuff, so please bear with me. If your goal is to distinguish between Luftwaffe units 1935-1945 and those post-war then I would suggest that they be put on different pages. I would further recommend placing the WW2 units on a different page from the pre-war (1935-1939) air units. In 1938-1939 the Luftwaffe began renaming its air units. Most wikipedia users are going to be interested in the Luftwaffe units that paticipated in WW2. The pre-war Condor Legion doesn't have a direct link to a specific WW2 unit.

A way to identify units in the overall period 1935-1945 could be to say for example: 'Hitler's Luftwaffe' instead of the 'Wehrmacht's Luftwaffe'. Most people will understand the first rather than the latter.

On the issue of what name to use (on the title of the page) for the air unit: squadron/staffel vs. gruppe vs. geschwader, etc.; I would recommend the geschwader because it is the only true or accurate way to represent (or track) it. Luftwaffe squadrons cannot be tracked with the same level of accuracy as the Geschwader. Of course, the unit size is the equivalent to a US WW2 era Air Wing or the British Air Group. We should use Air Wing. I am Saint77 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saint77 (talk • contribs) 22:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your last posting on my screen. The defeat of Hitler cut the cords of continuity for the most part on Luftwaffe units. And also why we go from Wehrmacht to Budeswehr, etc. US & British units history continues beyond the war. That is why they would be justifiably treated differently, however I would like to see WW2 units of all nations have different pages from current units. Many units only existed during the war, especially the German ones. Some current German units may try to tie themselves to old units, however for purposes of using these pages for historical research, it is much better to have the subject matter organized in the way most users will find it helpful. It is rather anoying to find current German units mixed in with WW2 era units. The same would hold true for naval and ground units. Of course that is my personal preference because I do extensive research related to WW2, more than any other period.

Also I'm not sold on using Wehrmacht. I think it is becoming dogmatic and not practical. The actual usage of "Luftwaffe" is more true to the actual reality of the written and spoken words during the war for both the Germans and us, then using "Wehrmacht's" Luftwaffe or any variation of that. When I spoke with German war veterans, they never used the term Wehrmacht when referring to their service in the Luftwaffe. Also the army veterans were more likely to use Wehrmacht then Heer, especially if they had fought against the Russians. Remember there are other ways that you can accomplish what it is I think you are trying to do on this point. Thanks for taking the time to respond.--Saint77 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saint77 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes[edit]

No problem. Dapi89 (talk) 10:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Siegfried Marseille[edit]

What do you make of this? [4]. Dapi89 (talk) 13:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)[edit]

The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Fort Eben-Emael[edit]

Nonsense. You have done a good job. Dapi89 (talk) 18:27, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant StG 2 not LG 2! Dapi89 (talk) 18:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'm an airborne warfare enthusiast and historian, and having completed Operation Tonga I've been drawn to Eben Emael and want to get it to GA status. I've done a lot already and I'm ready to begin writing the main body of the article. However, my references are kinda limited at the moment (Harclerode & Tugwell) and I was hoping you might want to collaborate on getting the article to GA status? For starters, I've cited the references properly, apart from the last one which is in German. I was hoping you might be able to, as I can't see an author as my German isn't exactly brilliant. Cheers! Skinny87 (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, I think we can make this a Good Article in a short time! For starters (when you get back, of course) do your sources give the strength of the 7th Infantry Division assigned to guard the bridges? Skinny87 (talk) 08:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:54, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heinz Krey[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Heinz Krey, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Heinz Franke. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 08:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carl-August Landfermann[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Carl-August Landfermann, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Erich Würdemann. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:19, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)[edit]

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:21, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pier Gerlofs Donia[edit]

Did you know (DYK) about Greate Pier? Last king of Frisia (talk) 08:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Georg Olschewski[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Georg Olschewski, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Erich Würdemann. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 12:49, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

I am trying on pl.wiki make translation of your article a medal but for 99 % it will be fail. So far main problem is that this is list :). On pl.wiki there is no guild how to create a featured list so i am trying "featured article" way do this. There is many red links - but so far pl.wiki accept that (i am quite sure that after my try that point will be added to regulations). If some users will be using a non wikiphilosophy of life arguments can i ask you about help ? PMG (talk) 22:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]