(*) As of January each year, except for 1941 which is as of 22 June 1941. German strength is entire strength, not only the Eastern Front. In July 1944 the Germans had over 1,500 tanks in Normandy and several hundred in other theatres such as Italy and the Balkans. Likewise, the Soviet kept about 3,000 tanks in the Far East through much of the war.
(**) German tank losses here include all fronts; the tank exchange ratio details estimated German losses to Anglo-American forces and so reflects only the Soviet-German loss. ^[1] Bouquey 19:26, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have got that in my library. Excellent source Irondome (talk) 19:27, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, indeed a very excellent source among Krivosheev's combat losses in XX'th Century. I'll try to add both with tables here: Equipment losses in World War II Btw. that was a super quick respone to my recent edit ^^) Regards Bouquey 19:35, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question, do you have more statistics, to add them into tables, namely Ellis, John (1993). World War II - A statistical survey? I think this would greatly improve the Article Equipment losses in World War II. Thanks. Bouquey 20:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I will have to look, but a lot of my library is in storage due to moving flat at the moment :( Irondome (talk) 20:26, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, take your time! Maybe I have luck and find it somewhere depicted on the net. Thanks in advance ;) Bouquey 20:50, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Statistics Part 2 ^[2]

Bouquey 20:06, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bouquey, this RfC has been open for the past four months, and a few editors have been at lager heads trying to resolve it. An Administrator has asked that I attempt to close it by making a change to the article. I realize this could be a sensitive subject, but as a Russian speaker could you look at what has been said and let me know your opinion? From your perspective, were my suppositions correct or not? Are there sources available that would support a more definitive statement, sources that are not influenced by the hand of the Soviet or post-Soviet power structure? If you decline or have no opinion that is fine as well. The last paragraph in the section's Talk-space summarizes my position. Thanks for your consideration. Gunbirddriver (talk) 11:24, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello GBD, I honestly don't want to take sides, so I'll try to be objectively.

It is almost impossible to find a modern russian explication and publication furthered by the RAS (Russian Academy of Sciences), which aren't heavy influenced by the post war power structure. You would even provoke an unpleasant wave of indignation when you ask for a reasonable justification in a open symposium, why the red army commited such atrocities. A recent supposition is publicated by Yelena Senyavskaya, she made an extensive study of Beevors allegations; Mostly with the predominantly argumentation that those are unfounded accusations and "lies" created and widespread by Goebbels propaganda machinery, which are still deeply anchored in mind of western citizen. However, a really sensitive subject, and I honestly don't want to be involved with. If you want to find some other sources which could support your statement, I would recommend you to look at Norman Naimark's publication. Best regards Bouquey (talk) 00:07, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your comments. Gunbirddriver (talk) 19:47, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Regards Bouquey (talk) 13:41, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How are things with you? I hope all ok. You have been a bit quiet lately. Just checking in :) Regards! Irondome (talk) 02:21, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use scrolling tables for article content - see MOS:SCROLL - it causes accessibility problems to readers accessing Wikipedia using screenreaders amongst other problems.Nigel Ish (talk) 14:59, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some fresh input on what the sources say about the subject would be welcome at this RfC. Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:40, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Martin, thank you for your message. While it's a very interesting Rfc, but to my regret, I'll have to reject your request. The general dissent seems to be unambiguous, and a rejection likely to be done. Regards Bouquey (talk) 12:05, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the back and forth on the page, you acted correctly. Bold edit reverted, then when added back you reverted again and requested the discussion be taken to the talk page. The other editor appears to be somewhat new to the process, and kept re-reverting. In point of fact he broke the three revert rule and you could ask for a sanction on the AN/3RR Noticeboard, but it seems the other editor realized finally what your criticism was and corrected it? If so I would leave it go, as no Administrator would want to be involved if the issue is resolved, 3RR or no. It might be useful to go to his user talk page and say something to the effect of "I saw your additions to the Equipment losses in WWII page. What I was trying to point out was there was a problem with the information you were adding. I see you caught the gist of what I was saying and the page looks fine now, but in the future if another editor reverts your editions it is best to discuss it on the talk page rather than revert back and forth. This helps to avoid conflicts between editors" or something like. We want to encourage other editors to contribute and guide them toward helpful interactions. From what I can see you pretty much have already done this. Best regards.Gunbirddriver (talk) 16:17, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You handled it well Jerome. I agree with GBD. Irondome (talk) 16:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you, I'd really appreciate that. You've been a great help, it will definitely help me on future cases. See you around :) Rgeards, Jerome Bouquey (talk) 17:49, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 01:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bouquey. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.

G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:

• tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
• updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
• creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.

For the Milhist co-ordinators. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:24, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]