This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Günther von Kluge 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 |
Archives: 1 |
Günther von Kluge has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on October 30, 2021. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERkludge.htm indicate Hans not Günther. 209.90.162.50 08:51, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Actually he was Hans Günther von Kluge. Mikkalai 05:57, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
von Kluge committed suicide during an airplane flight from Metz, France to Berlin, Germany. Some sources list his place of death as Metz (the origination of the flight) and some as Berlin (the desitination of the flight). I'm not sure what to put in the infobox place of death. If someone knows of a standard, please advise. FinFangFoom 11:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Most sources say that he used the given name Hans. His nickname "Kluge Hans" (clever Hans) confirms this. This article ought to be moved to either Hans von Kluge or Hans Günther von Kluge. Adam 12:47, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
The photo appears to have been sanitized to remove the standard uniform eagle & swastika. Sca 16:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
In answer to that, it is possible, that this is a family photo. From 1945 until 1949 there was no German government, only a military occupation, the Allied Control Council. One of the orders was the 'de-nazification', all items that showed a swastika were outlawed. Thus family photos showing uniforms had to have the swastika scratched off or covered with ink etc. or be destroyed.
Kazimierz Moczarski was an officer in the Polish Home Army. After the war he was imprisoned and was held in the same cell as Jürgen Stroop. In his book, Rozmowy z katem (Conversations with an Executioner), Chapter 23 is entitled Stroop Liquidates the Field-Marshal. Here Moczarski gives Stroop's description of how Stroop, as HSSPF of Rhein-Westmark was detailed by Himmler to investigate Kluge's involvement with the July Conspiracy. Upon collecting and finding "damning evidence", Stroop presented Kluge with the choice of suicide or the People's Court. Kluge refused, and according to Stroop, "In the end he found himself on the floor, on the beautiful carpet, with a bullet in his head...".
Himmler then instructed Stroop over the phone to write up his report to contain the airport suicide story. kovesp 23:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
This is unique and odd source; Kluge was very loyal to Hitler and he refused to respond to the conspirators although he didn't report on them. Field Marshal Keitel in his memoirs (Diary) mention that "Field Marshal Von Kluge and Field marshal Rommel knew were aware of the plot” However the statement from Jürgen Stroop would be better to have backup source in that matter as I find it unique (odd)!before it is added to the Encyclopedia ! Anybody know backup source to that? -- 78.89.1.3 ( talk) 14:22, 28 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.89.1.3 ( talk) 14:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the statement: "As commander of the Sixth Army Group, which became the German Fourth Army, Kluge led the Sixth into battle in Poland in 1939." - I can find no references to this elsewhere. Indeed, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_Army_(Germany), it states: "The 4th Army was activated on 1 December 1938 with General Günther von Kluge in command." with no mention of Sixth Army Group anywhere in the article. Does someone have references to prove that the Sixth Army Group became the German Fourth Army? Zargon2010 ( talk) 09:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Army Groups are the largest military units that has been used. For instance there were three German Army Groups that attacked France 10 May 1940, they were labeled as A, B and C. Each Army Group comprised several Armys, however the number of divisions is the most commonly used type of military units, when comparing forces during WW2. Before the war, no such formations as Army Groups existed. Boeing720 ( talk) 00:05, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
I undid the additions of Fellgiebel and Seemen, as superfluous. Please see Talk:Erich_von_Manstein, specifically this portion of the discussion: "Is there actually a dire need to have these citations in the article at all?". Please let me know if there are any concerns. K.e.coffman ( talk) 17:35, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
It may be so (as he at the summer of 1944 was in France) wasn't fully aware of the details regarding von Stauffenbeg's assassination attempt on Hitler, but von Kluge was certainly deeply involved in the resistance to Hitler and Nazism. For instance
Hans Hellmut Kirst lists him among the around 20 most significant persons in the resistance movement. "The 20th of July" is a novel, but only in the details. Kirst made a historical and very thorough research before writing that work, a work that is undisputed. He disapproved of the status that
Joseph Goebbels had given
Erwin Rommel during the war in northern Africa, and couldn't see Rommel as a leader of larger military units (Army Group size), which may have caused confusion. He (von Kluge) had a close relationship with
Henning von Tresckow and even if committed to his country, not to Hitler. Further , he was not just aware of the plans to kill Hitler (like
Erich von Manstein, who took the rather awkward position when asked if he wished to join the resistance, and replied "Prussian officers do not rebel" - but still didn't reveal the resistance either), von Kluge was an active part of it, but couldn't participate due to circumstances.
Injured in a traffic accident (!) in Russia, hospitalised and then moved to commander in the West (France).
von Stauffenberg was undoubtedly a brave man, but the reason for his great name in history was the opportunity. The "access" to Hitler. We can't know weather von Kluge had been equally daring in von Stauffenberg's position on 20.July 1944, but we can't know the opposite either.
Propose "was a part of the resistance"
Boeing720 (
talk) 10:05, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Compied from my Talk page. K.e.coffman ( talk) 05:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
From what I have researched, Kluge had conferences with conspirators of the 20 July plot, and he agreed to cooperate but only if Hitler was dead. When it was discovered that he survived, Kluge backed out. On 17 August 1944, he was dismissed because he refused to order a counter-attack, and Hitler was convinced he was negotiating with the Allies. Does that align with what you have read? Also, how much weight should be given to Stroop’s claim of killing Kluge? TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 02:48, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
I do not quite understand the sentence: "Kluge initially accepted the money, but after severe criticism from his Chief of Staff, Henning von Tresckow, who upbraided him for corruption, he agreed to meet Carl Friedrich Goerdeler in November 1942." I assume that he accepted the money, right? If this is the case, it reads odd, as "He initially ..., but ..." would imply that he eventually refused, not had a meeting with the conspirators. What does the source say about this?-- K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:14, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
K.e.coffman Ed is requesting that I mention Wolfgang Von Kluge’s rank. A book by Samuel W. Mitcham has it and describes his dishonorable discharge a month after his brother committed suicide. However, I recall a talk page discussion I cannot find at the moment that contests his reliability. What is your opinion—would it be alright to cite Mitcham for this? TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 17:42, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ed! ( talk · contribs) 00:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Looking at this one. —
Ed!
(talk) 00:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
OK. So taking a look at the page after both users' comments, they have addressed all of my major concerns, and as for any other questions I had, none really by itself is a reason to hold up the GAR. As such, going to Pass the GAN. Well done! — Ed! (talk) 22:59, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
I restored the image to the infobox [1]; my rationale was: "Later career photo is a better fit for the infobox". This photo also makes Kluge look like a real person, rather than a propaganda icon. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 15:55, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Felimy419 ( talk) 23:20, 7 June 2021 (UTC) Obviously this is also a subsection of the (linked) main article Battle of Moscow, so perhaps inevitably there is some repetition. But its not clear why so much detail has to be repeated . The main point in this article is not the sequence of events in the battle, but Kluges role in them. Would it not be better to say straight out that there was and is controversy surrounding the relationship between Kluge and his Panzer commanders and then leave the details to the main Battle of Moscow article ? A more specific criticism I have is the referencing of secondary sources. The statement "Moscow was a fortified position which the Wehrmacht lacked the strength to take in a frontal assault" is correctly cited as coming from Stahel. In the previous sentence the statement: "German forces lacked the numbers to encircle it" is an unsubstantiated speculation, and is obviously also from Stahel, but is not referenced as such but presented as a fact. At a minimum, reference Stahel but preferably cite his name (which is correctly done in the previous sentence) because the reference is not to a fact the historian discovered but to his opinion . In this vein it would be an improvement also to cite a countervailing opinion (eg Forczyk) who agrees with Guderian in blaming Kluge.
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Günther von Kluge 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 |
Archives: 1 |
Günther von Kluge has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on October 30, 2021. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERkludge.htm indicate Hans not Günther. 209.90.162.50 08:51, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Actually he was Hans Günther von Kluge. Mikkalai 05:57, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
von Kluge committed suicide during an airplane flight from Metz, France to Berlin, Germany. Some sources list his place of death as Metz (the origination of the flight) and some as Berlin (the desitination of the flight). I'm not sure what to put in the infobox place of death. If someone knows of a standard, please advise. FinFangFoom 11:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Most sources say that he used the given name Hans. His nickname "Kluge Hans" (clever Hans) confirms this. This article ought to be moved to either Hans von Kluge or Hans Günther von Kluge. Adam 12:47, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
The photo appears to have been sanitized to remove the standard uniform eagle & swastika. Sca 16:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
In answer to that, it is possible, that this is a family photo. From 1945 until 1949 there was no German government, only a military occupation, the Allied Control Council. One of the orders was the 'de-nazification', all items that showed a swastika were outlawed. Thus family photos showing uniforms had to have the swastika scratched off or covered with ink etc. or be destroyed.
Kazimierz Moczarski was an officer in the Polish Home Army. After the war he was imprisoned and was held in the same cell as Jürgen Stroop. In his book, Rozmowy z katem (Conversations with an Executioner), Chapter 23 is entitled Stroop Liquidates the Field-Marshal. Here Moczarski gives Stroop's description of how Stroop, as HSSPF of Rhein-Westmark was detailed by Himmler to investigate Kluge's involvement with the July Conspiracy. Upon collecting and finding "damning evidence", Stroop presented Kluge with the choice of suicide or the People's Court. Kluge refused, and according to Stroop, "In the end he found himself on the floor, on the beautiful carpet, with a bullet in his head...".
Himmler then instructed Stroop over the phone to write up his report to contain the airport suicide story. kovesp 23:12, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
This is unique and odd source; Kluge was very loyal to Hitler and he refused to respond to the conspirators although he didn't report on them. Field Marshal Keitel in his memoirs (Diary) mention that "Field Marshal Von Kluge and Field marshal Rommel knew were aware of the plot” However the statement from Jürgen Stroop would be better to have backup source in that matter as I find it unique (odd)!before it is added to the Encyclopedia ! Anybody know backup source to that? -- 78.89.1.3 ( talk) 14:22, 28 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.89.1.3 ( talk) 14:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the statement: "As commander of the Sixth Army Group, which became the German Fourth Army, Kluge led the Sixth into battle in Poland in 1939." - I can find no references to this elsewhere. Indeed, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_Army_(Germany), it states: "The 4th Army was activated on 1 December 1938 with General Günther von Kluge in command." with no mention of Sixth Army Group anywhere in the article. Does someone have references to prove that the Sixth Army Group became the German Fourth Army? Zargon2010 ( talk) 09:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Army Groups are the largest military units that has been used. For instance there were three German Army Groups that attacked France 10 May 1940, they were labeled as A, B and C. Each Army Group comprised several Armys, however the number of divisions is the most commonly used type of military units, when comparing forces during WW2. Before the war, no such formations as Army Groups existed. Boeing720 ( talk) 00:05, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
I undid the additions of Fellgiebel and Seemen, as superfluous. Please see Talk:Erich_von_Manstein, specifically this portion of the discussion: "Is there actually a dire need to have these citations in the article at all?". Please let me know if there are any concerns. K.e.coffman ( talk) 17:35, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
It may be so (as he at the summer of 1944 was in France) wasn't fully aware of the details regarding von Stauffenbeg's assassination attempt on Hitler, but von Kluge was certainly deeply involved in the resistance to Hitler and Nazism. For instance
Hans Hellmut Kirst lists him among the around 20 most significant persons in the resistance movement. "The 20th of July" is a novel, but only in the details. Kirst made a historical and very thorough research before writing that work, a work that is undisputed. He disapproved of the status that
Joseph Goebbels had given
Erwin Rommel during the war in northern Africa, and couldn't see Rommel as a leader of larger military units (Army Group size), which may have caused confusion. He (von Kluge) had a close relationship with
Henning von Tresckow and even if committed to his country, not to Hitler. Further , he was not just aware of the plans to kill Hitler (like
Erich von Manstein, who took the rather awkward position when asked if he wished to join the resistance, and replied "Prussian officers do not rebel" - but still didn't reveal the resistance either), von Kluge was an active part of it, but couldn't participate due to circumstances.
Injured in a traffic accident (!) in Russia, hospitalised and then moved to commander in the West (France).
von Stauffenberg was undoubtedly a brave man, but the reason for his great name in history was the opportunity. The "access" to Hitler. We can't know weather von Kluge had been equally daring in von Stauffenberg's position on 20.July 1944, but we can't know the opposite either.
Propose "was a part of the resistance"
Boeing720 (
talk) 10:05, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Compied from my Talk page. K.e.coffman ( talk) 05:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
From what I have researched, Kluge had conferences with conspirators of the 20 July plot, and he agreed to cooperate but only if Hitler was dead. When it was discovered that he survived, Kluge backed out. On 17 August 1944, he was dismissed because he refused to order a counter-attack, and Hitler was convinced he was negotiating with the Allies. Does that align with what you have read? Also, how much weight should be given to Stroop’s claim of killing Kluge? TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 02:48, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
I do not quite understand the sentence: "Kluge initially accepted the money, but after severe criticism from his Chief of Staff, Henning von Tresckow, who upbraided him for corruption, he agreed to meet Carl Friedrich Goerdeler in November 1942." I assume that he accepted the money, right? If this is the case, it reads odd, as "He initially ..., but ..." would imply that he eventually refused, not had a meeting with the conspirators. What does the source say about this?-- K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:14, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
K.e.coffman Ed is requesting that I mention Wolfgang Von Kluge’s rank. A book by Samuel W. Mitcham has it and describes his dishonorable discharge a month after his brother committed suicide. However, I recall a talk page discussion I cannot find at the moment that contests his reliability. What is your opinion—would it be alright to cite Mitcham for this? TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 17:42, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ed! ( talk · contribs) 00:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Looking at this one. —
Ed!
(talk) 00:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
OK. So taking a look at the page after both users' comments, they have addressed all of my major concerns, and as for any other questions I had, none really by itself is a reason to hold up the GAR. As such, going to Pass the GAN. Well done! — Ed! (talk) 22:59, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
I restored the image to the infobox [1]; my rationale was: "Later career photo is a better fit for the infobox". This photo also makes Kluge look like a real person, rather than a propaganda icon. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 15:55, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Felimy419 ( talk) 23:20, 7 June 2021 (UTC) Obviously this is also a subsection of the (linked) main article Battle of Moscow, so perhaps inevitably there is some repetition. But its not clear why so much detail has to be repeated . The main point in this article is not the sequence of events in the battle, but Kluges role in them. Would it not be better to say straight out that there was and is controversy surrounding the relationship between Kluge and his Panzer commanders and then leave the details to the main Battle of Moscow article ? A more specific criticism I have is the referencing of secondary sources. The statement "Moscow was a fortified position which the Wehrmacht lacked the strength to take in a frontal assault" is correctly cited as coming from Stahel. In the previous sentence the statement: "German forces lacked the numbers to encircle it" is an unsubstantiated speculation, and is obviously also from Stahel, but is not referenced as such but presented as a fact. At a minimum, reference Stahel but preferably cite his name (which is correctly done in the previous sentence) because the reference is not to a fact the historian discovered but to his opinion . In this vein it would be an improvement also to cite a countervailing opinion (eg Forczyk) who agrees with Guderian in blaming Kluge.