This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
This redirect 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 links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
[[Trieste#Yugoslav and New Zealand involvement|Battle of Trieste]] The anchor (#Yugoslav and New Zealand involvement) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors
I removed the following because it is an unsourced POV:
However, use of the terms in naming such events is not consistent. For example, the Battle of the Atlantic was more or less an entire theatre of war, and the so-called battle lasted for the duration of the entire war. Another misnomer is the Battle of Britain, which by all rights should be considered a campaign, not a mere battle.
It should only be reinstated if there is a source to justify it. The RAF define the Battle of Britain as a Battle honour[1] and the Royal Navy call it the Battle of the Atlantic[2]. As a general rule it is the Americans who defined geographic theatres in World War II (see Theater (warfare)) --Philip Baird Shearer18:28, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have just removed the section which was a cut and past of List of theaters and campaigns of World War II. This article is already too large (more than 35K ?). It would be better if it was a list of lists rather than one big list. For example when
I am against this one article [(List_of_military_engagements_of_World_War_II)] in the shape it is in because it is already warns at the top of an edit "This page is 39 kilobytes long. This may be longer than is preferable; see article size." and many of the lists are by no means complete For example there were 100s of bomber raids like the one listed at the moment. Here are the major raids by the RAF for Just April 1945:
April 1st, Mannheim by 478 aircraft;
2nd, Cologne 858 aircraft;
3rd, Kamen 234, Dortmund-Ems Canal, 220;
4th, small raids; 5-6th, Chemnitz 760, smaller raids 1,223;
daylight on the 23rd, about 300 bombers carried out small raids.
23-24th, 195 Lancasters and 23 Mosquitos from 5 and 8 Groups carried out the last raid on the town of Wesel. The attack was part of 537 sorties flown as tactical attacks in support of the British Army’s crossing of the Rhine on the 24th.
On April 25th there were attacks on towns with communication support for German troops defending the Rhine: Hanover 267, Munster 175, Osnabruck 156.
On the 27th, there were attacks on Paderborn 268, Hamm area 150 and smaller raids 541.
You deleted a large segment of List of military engagements of World War II, declaring it was a copy of List of theaters and campaigns of World War II. Regretfully you did not notice that the segment you removed differed from and was larger than the other one. I with many others have been working hard on it, so please do not make such drastic changes without suggesting it first on the talk page. Furthermore, I think the extent of List of military engagements of World War II as it is now is legitimate, and I am sure others agree. I am however open for new suggestions, but I think the organization of pages/campaigns/theatres/battles/operations etc etc must be thoroughly discussed and thought through. Maybe some hierarchical organization of pages is needed? Regards, Dennis Nilsson. Dna-Dennis06:17, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Note: "List of World War II theaters and campaigns" is now "List of theaters and campaigns of World War II".
My answers:
What I mean by "extent of this list": contents, coverage, scope. What it encompasses, contains, covers.
Article size: The warning says "This page is 39 kilobytes long. This may be longer than is preferable." This is only a general guideline. Please see Wikipedia:Article size which states Limits on article size are set by...considerations of readability and organization. and states that article sizes are less critical for lists.
I believe that the scope of this list (as it stands now) is legitimate, and the size issue is of less importance. This is only due to organizational reasons; I believe Wikipedia gains from a coherent organization of the complexity and vast number of military engagements during World War II. In my opinion, before this list was created, a number of more or less corresponding lists existed in a non-orderly fashion:
My ambition was to try to bring order into the chaos. But please note: I am naturally open for suggestions and I do not cling to keeping this list undivided. But I sincerely think that we have much to gain from starting with a single comprehensive and extensive list (as this one), and later, when the need arises, go from there to a division and reorganization of the military engagements. As was indicated in the previous post "Article Size", I sincerely agree that the objective of the list should not be as a single list of every military engagement, and every single bomber raid should not be in the list. Certainly not, of course not! This was never the ambition; it was rather, as indicated, to act as an overview and a start-off point. But I repeat, we have to start from somewhere, and the organization of the list as it stands now is legitimate, until future contributions to this article and others give reason to a new, major, reorganization. My regards, Dennis Nilsson. Dna-Dennis13:06, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
PS. It was actually originally suggested by another wikipedian in this old version. I did it partly because of that suggestion, which I found reasonable. DS.
One thing I wish to bring attention to is the fact that the Eastern Front is severely [fatally] underrepresented. Only the middle-school textbook battles are found here, while the real quantity and scope of the battles not mentioned here (ie: Smolensk, just as an example)dwarfs that of the vast majority of operations carried out by the western Allies listed here.
I guess as a timetable/summary of WWII this article may possibly be useful, but as is, it is severely biased and IMO fails to meet even the basic Wikipedia standards on objectivity. More attention to the war's largest theater is vital if it is to have any credibility whatsoever.--128.205.46.243 (talk) 23:10, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are a bunch of battles during World War II that are missing, and some of them are pretty important. For example, under the 1943 section, I found that the Battle of Tarawa was not mentioned. I have created a link, but I need help. People, please check battles in certain theaters of the war and make sure that they're also linked to from this page.
I noticed an error on the page, the Battle of Singapore is put under 1941, however on the battle of singapore page it is dated February 1942. one of the two pages must be incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zimmer173 (talk • contribs) 23:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to do this, so I ask others to do it for me. I think the search term "List of battles in World War 2" should link to this page, as I find "Military Engagements" harder to remember than "Battles". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.103.198.253 (talk) 15:20, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reason for request of deletion: List of World War II battles already exists, this article is mostly unnecessary and should be removed or merged with the proper article. Please discuss below this post whether a proposed deletion should be added. Antny08 (talk) 14:47, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]