Talk:Soviet Union in World War II

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Soviet Union in World War II article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

History High‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

European history High‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Former countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles

Military history: Asian / European / Russian & Soviet / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	European military history task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	World War II task force

Russia: History B‑class High‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.

Socialism High‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Soviet Union B‑class High‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

About invasion to Japan

Why there isnt about Soviet invasion to Japan in august 1945? This was also part of World War II. there for, there was a war in japan during the world war two.--Propatriamori (talk) 14:39, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

agree--Crossswords (talk) 17:16, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable tactics

The section "Questionable tactics" should be renamed to "War crimes" or "Possible war crimes" if that's more NPOV, because in context a discussion of tactics during battlefield operation would be expected under a section titled "Questionable tactics". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.205.147 (talk) 21:23, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What idiot wrote this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.199.225.128 (talk) 06:45, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The secion includes a Katyn massacre picture. I have moved it.Xx236 (talk) 10:12, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

yes, the title is ridiculous and should be fixed. My very best wishes (talk) 01:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SMERSH

Does the page inform about the role of the SMERSH?Xx236 (talk) 07:29, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the lede of "SMERSH" poorly informs reader. Welcome to fix. My very best wishes (talk) 01:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Russian words

This is an English languge Wikipedia, so why so many Russsian words? Why only Russian words? The soldiers belonged to tens of Soviet nations. And your sources contain many errors.Xx236 (talk) 07:41, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

budionnovka ?

Did WWII officers wear budionnovkas? Xx236 (talk) 07:42, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was replaced by Ushanka in 1940. Xx236 (talk) 07:45, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Either the Osprey book was misquoted or the book is unreliable.Xx236 (talk) 07:50, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

peshkon

The Russian word is peshkom.Xx236 (talk) 10:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And the meaning of the word is to move on foot in general, no way it means infantry.--Artur Zinatullin (talk) 10:39, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moróz

Moroz Xx236 (talk) 10:31, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is all ridiculous. However, the real problem are not these words, but whole section "The Frontoviks". It reads like a personal essay. Welcome to fix if you can. My very best wishes (talk) 01:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this section made me laugh. It tells: In "Red Army, all infantry divisions were labeled streltsi divisions". "streltsi"?? That streltsy? This reminds me "Etot gus' svin'ja ne drukk" by Yuliy Kim. My very best wishes (talk) 18:26, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Moorhouse

According to Roger Moorhouse (The Devils' Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941) Stalin believed that the concentration of Wehrmacht troops was a part of political negotiations.Xx236 (talk) 10:15, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is something rather complicated. See Soviet offensive plans controversy. My very best wishes (talk) 01:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wehrmacht forces in Warsaw?

The crimes were committed mainly by SS and RONA.Xx236 (talk) 10:37, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fix it. My very best wishes (talk) 01:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The pact was reached two days after the breakdown of Soviet military talks with British and French representatives

Old Soviet propaganda - good Stalin wanted peace, but bad capitalists didn't. It was business as usual, democrats weren't able to offer Poland, so Stalin preferred Hitler. Creating long border with Nazi Germany was the best way to invite the Nazis to Russia. Stalin hoped that French-German war would continue long time (like WWI) and destroy both nations. Xx236 (talk) 12:36, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. See Soviet offensive plans controversy and Victor Suvorov. My very best wishes (talk) 01:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are pictures acceptable in the lead section?

If yes - which ones and how many? Xx236 (talk) 12:40, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

At least one picture is irrelevant and must be removed - agree. My very best wishes (talk) 01:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The picture about human losses would be just fine if we had a section about human losses in this war. But unfortunately, there is no such section here (I think we have a separate wikipage about it). My very best wishes (talk) 17:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And BTW, I just removed your edit. Why? First, it must be sourced better (this is your responsibility). Second, the source does not really supports the claim, it must support the statement directly. Finally, this is not so simple. Soviet historiography did cover that period of history. My very best wishes (talk) 18:09, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WTF is this BS?

This article is politically biased, and I cannot "ass-ume" it "in good faith."

Why is there no mention in the header section of the contributions made by the Soviet peoples to the war? More Russians died in the Battle of Stalingrad alone than of all the Allied Forces combined during the whole war.

The header section reads like a memo, not an encyclopedia article. It should be a general overview, not a rendition of subjectively selected factoids. The opening sentence is ridiculous, for it has practically no relevance to what actually occurred during the war. The idiot that wrote it should never touch this article again. Would you begin the story of the USA in WWII by retelling how many American magnates were invested in Hitler's armies and profited by the war? Ahpavel (talk) 16:46, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think starting with personal assaults like "idiot that wrote it" is a good start to editing Wikipedia.Miacek (talk) 17:08, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested edit: intro

Last sentence of intro has;

:...the Soviet Union, which suffered the highest military casualties in the war, losing more than 20 million men.

Perhaps

the Soviet Union, which suffered the highest military casualties (about 10 million) in the war, losing more than 20 million men (in total).

Military deaths is roughly 10.1 in the intro info box, and 8.7m to 11.4m at World War II casualties. Is the term “men” okay? MBG02 (talk) 10:16, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"800 deaths per minute"

There is a quote from a book "Dowling, Timothy C. (2014), Russia at War: From the Mongol Conquest to Afghanistan, Chechnya, and Beyond, ABC-CLIO, ISBN 9781598849486" where it states 800 soviets died per minute during the war. This is incorrect, is should be 800 deaths per HOUR. How do I handle this ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spetsnaz84 (talk • contribs) 12:14, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Frontoviki

The section is full of irrelevant facts and factual errors. The term фронтовик referred to all military personnel who where deployed to the front lines and took part in action, including the personnel of near-front zone, like drivers, HQ staff, medics and others. Conscription age was 18-50 years of age. Certain specialists, qualified workers, students of some schools had a reserve from conscription, but lots of them enlisted as volunteers. Females of certain professions, like nurses, medical doctors, railroad personnel where subject to conscription also. The whole section is not following the encyclopedic style standards, Russian terms are mostly spelled wrong. The section is garbage that should be deleted and rewritten.Artur Zinatullin (talk) 20:11, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Also note that almost all of the references in this section point to the same book by Osprey, which is not a publisher of "serious" books (i.e. written by actual historians) but of "popular military history" divulgators. I'd like to see this rewritten using actual historians as reference. 152.170.173.200 (talk) 03:10, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Osprey is a reliable source. Osprey Publishing is an Oxford-based publishing company specializing in military history.https://ospreypublishing.com/ https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Osprey_Publishing James Harden21 (talk) 17:36, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Osprey is a publisher. And the books it has published range from brilliant to total garbage. As we see in this article, the books used at least can be interpreted in a very wrong way and instead of adding value to the article make a "you see, I did not make this bullshit myself" impression.Artur Zinatullin (talk) 10:46, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

World War II military deaths in Europe by theater and by year.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:37, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]