This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
7th SS Volunteer Mountain Division Prinz Eugen article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Operation Kopaonik was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 13 January 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into 7th SS Volunteer Mountain Division Prinz Eugen. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
Added mention that the 7th SS was equipped entirely with foreign equipment. -- KobaVanDerLubbe 15:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Image:SS Volunteer Mountain Division Prinz Eugen.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 17:25, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I would like to remove this as source, as it does not meet WP:RS criteria in supporting the claim in the article.
This is a book by a participant in the events (memoirs); further it should be considered apologia as it was published by Munin-Verlag, which (according to the German wikipedia) is a right-wing extremist German publishing company. Please let me know if there are any objections or concerns. K.e.coffman ( talk) 21:14, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
I have some sources that call these unit histories "tendentious" and Otto Kumm an "unreformed Nazi enthusiast." His unit history is used uncritically -- who knows what he means by "crushing the partisans" and "bravery." For the unit movements it may be okay, though.
Here are the sources in context:
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)How would you recommend handling -- integrate some of these sources into the article, to provide context? Or remove the non-NPOV language? --
PS - Still, on another thread, an editor pointed out that even a biased source has to meet "normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking." Given the above assessments, Otto Kumm's work does not pass. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
I wonder if there's a referencing error here: "...Kumm managed to avoid extradition to Yugoslavia by fleeing over the wall of the internment camp of Dachau.[30]" Kumm 2007, p. book cover.
The only 2007 book in the references is Pavlowitch, Stevan K. (2007). So I assume it must be the one being referenced in the extradition statement. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:31, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Line: [a SS unit] that served alongside but was never formally part of the Wehrmacht during World War II in Yugoslavia. - o. k. It was "never" formally part of Wehrmacht. Why this introduction discusses things that factually never happened, or why should it have been part of Wehrmacht ? SA was also never part of Wehrmacht, or Nazi German Police etc. Btw, never part of the Wehrmacht during World War II in Yugoslavia ? Awkward statement. In Yugoslavia ? That SS formation served in Yugoslavia, and nowhere else. -- 129.187.244.19 ( talk) 11:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
That is, the mass executions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.173.104.13 ( talk) 16:12, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Regarding the lack of prosecution of the war crimes by Allied personnel.
it's uncited, but it is also incomplete, I believe. Another article also says that this finding was also not applied to individual soldiers unless they could be shown to have personally participated in one or more atrocities. Possibly that was a different finding about a separate trial, in which case fine; statement can be returned if cited. Elinruby ( talk) 04:26, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
7th SS Volunteer Mountain Division Prinz Eugen article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Operation Kopaonik was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 13 January 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into 7th SS Volunteer Mountain Division Prinz Eugen. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
Added mention that the 7th SS was equipped entirely with foreign equipment. -- KobaVanDerLubbe 15:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Image:SS Volunteer Mountain Division Prinz Eugen.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 17:25, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I would like to remove this as source, as it does not meet WP:RS criteria in supporting the claim in the article.
This is a book by a participant in the events (memoirs); further it should be considered apologia as it was published by Munin-Verlag, which (according to the German wikipedia) is a right-wing extremist German publishing company. Please let me know if there are any objections or concerns. K.e.coffman ( talk) 21:14, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
I have some sources that call these unit histories "tendentious" and Otto Kumm an "unreformed Nazi enthusiast." His unit history is used uncritically -- who knows what he means by "crushing the partisans" and "bravery." For the unit movements it may be okay, though.
Here are the sources in context:
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)How would you recommend handling -- integrate some of these sources into the article, to provide context? Or remove the non-NPOV language? --
PS - Still, on another thread, an editor pointed out that even a biased source has to meet "normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking." Given the above assessments, Otto Kumm's work does not pass. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:27, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
I wonder if there's a referencing error here: "...Kumm managed to avoid extradition to Yugoslavia by fleeing over the wall of the internment camp of Dachau.[30]" Kumm 2007, p. book cover.
The only 2007 book in the references is Pavlowitch, Stevan K. (2007). So I assume it must be the one being referenced in the extradition statement. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:31, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Line: [a SS unit] that served alongside but was never formally part of the Wehrmacht during World War II in Yugoslavia. - o. k. It was "never" formally part of Wehrmacht. Why this introduction discusses things that factually never happened, or why should it have been part of Wehrmacht ? SA was also never part of Wehrmacht, or Nazi German Police etc. Btw, never part of the Wehrmacht during World War II in Yugoslavia ? Awkward statement. In Yugoslavia ? That SS formation served in Yugoslavia, and nowhere else. -- 129.187.244.19 ( talk) 11:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
That is, the mass executions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.173.104.13 ( talk) 16:12, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Regarding the lack of prosecution of the war crimes by Allied personnel.
it's uncited, but it is also incomplete, I believe. Another article also says that this finding was also not applied to individual soldiers unless they could be shown to have personally participated in one or more atrocities. Possibly that was a different finding about a separate trial, in which case fine; statement can be returned if cited. Elinruby ( talk) 04:26, 2 July 2023 (UTC)