Talk:Battles of Rzhev

Comments

Sorry for careless reverting. Mikkalai 20:44, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

where's the battle bar?

Strength? Commanders? Countries (hahah), etc.

"A reminder of these nameless and apparently futile battles"

Says who?

if they want to censor history - that tells you it was not a great battle! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.31.3.195 (talk) 19:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

These battles were a strategic defeat for the Soviets. They were therefore censored out of history. This article is an opportunity for the truth to be preserved. I suggest that the article be edited by someone for whom English is a first language.203.184.41.226 (talk) 09:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

propose to move

Propose to move this article to Rzhev-Vyazma strategic offensive operation, this being the name of the overall operations in the Belyi - Rzhev - Viazma salient. Actual battles will be dealt with under their five component operation articles, i.e. the 41st Army operations around Belyi, 21st Army operations around Gusevo, 39th Army around Molodoi Tud, 30th Army north of Rzhev, 31st Army in the Zubtsov area, 20th Army in the Tatarinka area, 29th Army in the Sychevka-Gzhatsk sector, and the 5th and 33rd Armies around Viazma.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 02:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Operation Mars?

Can someone clarify this?
This article says in the introduction this was “a series of World War II offensives launched during January 8, 1942—March 22, 1942” and says the last was “:Rzhev offensive operation (Operation Mars) (03.03-20.04.42).”
But then in the "Rzhev-Sychevka Strategic Offensive Operation (Operation Mars)" section it has “The next Rzhev-Sychevka Offensive (25 November 1942 - 20 December 1942) codenamed Operation Mars".
Also, The Operation Mars page has “Operation Mars was the operation codename for the Rzhev offensive operation part of the Rzhev-Vyazma strategic offensive operation (08.01-20.04.42), but then says “It took place between 25 November-20 December, 1942”.
Which is correct? Or are they referring to two operations by the same name? Xyl 54 (talk) 15:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Inacurate link

Rzhev-Sychevka Offensive Operation currently links to Operation Büffel. Th elink text refers to a summer offensive in 1942 and the linked to page is a stub of the german with drwawl in 1943. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christwelfwww (talk • contribs) 22:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Unproductive talk page

It seems this talk pager is not particularly productive. Since its inception no discussion took place!

Therefore all issued raised remain in limbo:

1. where's the battle bar?

2. Strength? Commanders? Countries, etc.

3. "A reminder of these nameless and apparently futile battles" Says who? - It seems the 'battles' have been named

4. propose to move this article to Rzhev-Vyazma strategic offensive operation, this being the name of the overall operations in the Belyi - Rzhev - Viazma salient. --mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 02:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC) Note - user blocked indefinitely

5. Operation Mars?

a) This article says in the introduction this was “a series of World War II offensives launched during January 8, 1942—March 22, 1942” and says the last was “:Rzhev offensive operation (Operation Mars) (03.03-20.04.42).”

b) But then in the "Rzhev-Sychevka Strategic Offensive Operation (Operation Mars)" section it has “The next Rzhev-Sychevka Offensive (25 November 1942 - 20 December 1942) codenamed Operation Mars".

c) Also, The Operation Mars page has “Operation Mars was the operation codename for the Rzhev offensive operation part of the Rzhev-Vyazma strategic offensive operation (08.01-20.04.42), but then says “It took place between 25 November-20 December, 1942”.

d) Which is correct? Or are they referring to two operations by the same name? Xyl 54 (talk) 15:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

6. Inacurate link - Rzhev-Sychevka Offensive Operation currently links to Operation Büffel. Th elink text refers to a summer offensive in 1942 and the linked to page is a stub of the german with drwawl in 1943. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christwelfwww (talk • contribs) 22:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC) - fixed Crock81 (talk) 05:39, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Stalin as a front commander at Rzhev?

The article claims that Stalin was personally in command of Operation Mars and the Rzhev front in 1942. That seems a bit much even for Wikipedia. 70.234.237.246 (talk) 09:04, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

not only the article, apparently it is a conclusion of Russian research after 1991. it is not weird rzhev is researched, the nr of two million dead Russians was once quite commonplace. Rhzev has the hallmarks of the master, grandiose, useless, badly prepared, uncoordinated offensives leading to unacceptable bloodlet? stalin .... 62.163.114.47 (talk) 06:29, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Russian Research after 1991 has generally concluded that Stalin was personally responsible for every setback and negative outcome in the war. Stalin makes mistakes. Soviet Generals never do. 12.12.144.130 (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

comments on the Third Rzhev–Sychevka Offensive Operation

The history of this "operation" has been a long-running controversy. The German and Soviet histories are completely at odds with each other. The German sources say that "Operation Buffalo" was conducted according to a careful plan and experienced almost no meaningful interference by the Soviet side. The Soviet sources claim that it was a panic evacuation which occured simultaniously with a Soviet offensive and forced the German side to abandon all sorts of military equipment.

I tend to really question if there ever was an operation which would qualify as an offensive. It seems as if the offensive was sort of retroactively invented. There was certainly an advance in the wake of the German pullout, but calling that an offensive seems incorrect. 70.234.244.78 (talk) 19:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that Wikipedia depends on secondary sources and mose of the secondary sources on the Soviet side are influenced by pre-1990 Soviet war history. After the war, the official soviet historians generated a mostly false but incredibly detailed spin-narrative of the war made up of constant "offensives". Any German withdrawal by choice is always presented in the Soviet sources as the result of an offensive. Its rather questionable if there is any controversy. The story presented in the Soviet sources just makes no sense at all. 12.12.144.130 (talk) 22:02, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Casualties of the Soviet forces

"By providing the data in the stored documents of Russian Ministry of Defence, Isayev stated that the "research" of Svetlana Aleksandrovna Gerasimova belongs to the type of "research on the high-heel shoes"."

This sentence is sexist abuse and should be deleted. Isayev's substantive attack is given in the following sentence ("The claimed of above journalist are also judgment of people without adequate knowledge of history, and are the results of demagogic motivation under the slogan "every information must be shown to the people".") Michael GF (talk) 19:49 AEST, 19 May 2013

did some copyedit elsewhere , the whole paragraph has me dumbfounded, that said somewhat revealing:) it is also nice isayev explains his motivations concerning the protocol around hero citys:) I will hope it will come to my mind again some other day:) 62.163.114.47 (talk) 06:21, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

A review in the Journal of Slavic Military Studies described Gerasimova's work as 'impressive,' and 'well researched and effectively argued,' though noting it did show its origins as a PhD thesis. [1] Buckshot06 (talk) 07:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I removed the paragraph: "The race of the numbers of casualties at Rzhev" continued with the data of researcher Svetlana Aleksandrovna Gerasimova from National Museum at Tver. In her thesis Rzhev-Sychyovka, the first offensive in 1942 under a new point of view, Gerasimova claimed that 1,325,823 Soviet troops lost their lives during the four offensives at that area." because of dubious accuracy.

In her book, she clearly states: The total casualties over approximately eight months of fighting (out of 15 months between the start and endpoint of the operations) amounts to 1,324,823 men, which is a higher number than the total Soviet losses in the Battle of Stalingrad. The irrecoverable losses over this time at the Rzhev salient comprised 433,037 men, in the Stalingrad battle – 478,741 men, which is also fully comparable. This figure comes from the book Rossiia i SSSR v voinakh XX veka: Statisticheskoe issledovanie [Russia and the USSR in the Wars of the XX Century: A statistical analysis]. Wildkatzen (talk) 11:52, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

She concludes: the human losses of the Red Army in the fighting at the Rzhev – Viaz’ma staging area might possibly even exceed 2,000,000 men (p.158) and list ultimately a loss of 2,300,000 men. (p.159) Wildkatzen (talk) 11:58, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Reworded first paragraph

The first paragraph had the Russian for "Battles of Rzhev" after the term "Rzhev Meat-Grinder," and mentioned the "meat grinder" term twice. I reworded it so that the Russian terms directly follow the English ones, and the reason why the battles were called the "Rzhev Meat-Grinder" was included in the first sentence. The result is a bit unwieldy, but does put the Russian terms in the right place. Roches (talk) 17:25, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Stalemate?

The description of this battle as a "stalemate" is beyond weird. The Soviet accomplished none of their objectives in the face of massive losses. That is usually known (outside Wikipedia) as a defeat. 12.12.144.130 (talk) 21:43, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battles of Rzhev. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140811182349/http://graph.document.kremlin.ru/page.aspx?869039 to http://graph.document.kremlin.ru/page.aspx?869039

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:18, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battles of Rzhev. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151228032412/http://ww2stats.com/cas_ger_okh_dec42.html to http://ww2stats.com/cas_ger_okh_dec42.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130525020822/http://ww2stats.com/cas_ger_okh_dec43.html to http://ww2stats.com/cas_ger_okh_dec43.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:20, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2019

My rational to restore previous stable version diff was that the site actualhistory.ru looks like a personal homepage, with opinions on issues ranging from controversies, news, myths and even movies etc. The webpage also seem not be maintained since 2012. Probably defunct. Russian historian Svetlana Gerasimova has written extensively on the topic in her 2013 issued book "The Rzhev Slaughterhouse: The Red Army's Forgotten 15-Month Campaign Against Army Group Center, 1942-1943". She states that the 'commonly [German losses] cited 350,000 - 400,000 lack substantiation' and that Soviet archival records miss casualty entries for the months of May-July and October-November 1942, January-February 1943.

She therefore maintains that 2,300,000 men must have perished, captured or wounded. If necessary, I can provide the relevant book pages. Wildkatzen (talk) 20:10, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

After Meliodas Samas edit today, who('s) - apperently WP:WIKIHOUNDing me since the last article - does not seem to be aware, that four major offensive operations against the Rzhev-Viaz’ma salient were fought. Therefore the name of the article, Battles of Rzhev. However, in order to raise awareness I will provide a full-length quote of the aforementioned book below. Wildkatzen (talk) 14:49, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

In the official version of the Great Patriotic War, and indeed of the entire Second World War, the Battle of Stalingrad is considered the most bloody. However, the analysis of combat operations on certain sectors of the Soviet-German front, which at times heated up during offensive operations, then became quiet for some time, as happened, for example, in the areas of the Rzhev – Viaz’ma salient and Leningrad, permit one to speak about the more significant human losses, naturally, with regard to the losses in all the operations conducted there.

[...]

The casualty figures, as recorded in the documents of the fronts and armies that fought in the region of the Rzhev salient, were kept classified in the Ministry of Defense’s Central Archive. They emerged only in step with the divulgence of facts from the history of combat operations in the Rzhev – Viaz’ma expanse. The process was gradual, and the figures that appeared were plainly understated. [...]

The total casualties over approximately eight months of fighting (out of 15 months between the start and endpoint of the operations) amounts to 1,324,823 men, which is a higher number than the total Soviet losses in the Battle of Stalingrad. The irrecoverable losses over this time at the Rzhev salient comprised 433,037 men, in the Stalingrad battle – 478,741 men, which is also fully comparable.

In the 1990s and the present decade, individual scholars, including foreign scholars, who disagreed with the official casualty figures, tried to estimate the Soviet losses in the separate operations. As already mentioned previously, S.N. Mikhalev placed the losses of the Soviet armies in the 1942 Rzhev – Viaz’ma operation at 948,000 men. According to H. Grossmann, Russian casualties in the summer-autumn fighting of 1942 amounted to 380,000 men; according to incomplete data in the possession of the author of these lines, Soviet operational losses in August-September 1942 were more than 300,000 men. D. Glantz agrees with the German estimate of Russian casualties in the Second Rzhev – Sychevka Operation, which puts them at 335,000 men. These calculations and estimates increase the total casualties in the four operations to up to 1,700,000 men.

This figure is not conclusive, since the number of Soviet missing-in-action and prisoners-of-war have not been determined. Moreover, none of the official figures include the casualties over the seven months when there were no offensives underway – over May-July and October-November 1942, and January-February 1943, and they, as already noted above, were frequently significant. Let’s recall at least the losses in the defensive operation of the Kalinin Front in July 1942 in the Belyi area, when approximately 50,000 alone were taken prisoner. With the inclusion of casualties from these seven months between offensives, as one can assume, the human losses of the Red Army in the fighting at the Rzhev – Viaz’ma staging area might possibly even exceed 2,000,000 men.

[...]

Including the official casualty figures in the excluded operations, the total losses approach 2,300,000 men.

— Svetlana Gerasimova, The Rzhev Slaughterhouse, 2013

Protected

I have protected the article for a week. Please settle you dispute on the talk page or on some dispute resolution boards rather than edit war. As an editor I think that if the sources contradict each other then we should present both versions unless one of the sources is completely unreliable Alex Bakharev (talk) 01:47, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Result of the Battle

Russian historian Svetlana Gerasimova states in her 2013 issued book "The Rzhev Slaughterhouse: The Red Army's Forgotten 15-Month Campaign Against Army Group Center, 1942-1943" pp 167-9, that both sides failed to archive their ultimate operational objectives. Therefore, the result should be 'inconclusive' as per military infobox guidelines. Wildkatzen (talk) 12:43, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Extended content

Just who won and who lost the Battle of Rzhev? The question is not at all a simple one. Upon examining this question, the Battle of Rzhev is reminiscent of the Battle of Borodino; even today, historians still argue over who won that battle. In both battles, the sides didn’t achieve their ultimate objectives, but at the same time fulfilled specific assignments. Several scholars believe that the Battle of Borodino had no victor, but gave a morale boost to the Russians. The results of the Battle of Rzhev in a certain way are similar to this situation, but with a minus sign on the Russian side with respect to morale. The Soviet forces in 1943 made significant territorial gains. Unquestionably, the elimination of the dangerous German staging area in the center of the Soviet-German front and the simultaneous removal of a constant threat to the Soviet capital must be viewed as an important result and one with strategic significance. The liberation of Rzhev and other cities and towns in the German salient, which the Soviet forces had been unable to take for many months, was an important political result. But this victory was far from triumphal in the way of the Battle of Stalingrad: the primary objective of all the operations in the area of the Rzhev – Viaz’ma salient – the destruction of the main forces of Army Group Center – was not achieved. The German forces voluntarily withdrew from the salient, unbeaten and unbowed on this sector on this sector of the front. They did of their own volition what their opponent had been trying to force them do for more than a year, and in the process conserved their strength for future operations. However, at the same time the Wehrmacht could no longer hold on to the salient, and it lost its strategically advantageous staging area at the center of the Eastern Front. The Germans were compelled to abandon Rzhev, this eponymic city, which personified the defense of a large territory, this “gateway to Berlin”. For both one side and the other, this was a lost victory. But for both sides, this victory was even more a pyrrhic one. The Rzhev salient, the “Rzhev bulge” became for both armies a “black hole” that sucked in and swallowed large numbers of troops. In the memory of the Soviet soldiers that served there, it remained the “Rzhev meat grinder”, the “Abyss”. To the present day, in the villages of many districts around Rzhev, the expression “herded at Rzhev” still circulates. This actually was a Moloch, which devoured their children. The heroism and self-sacrifice of some stood side-by-side with the negligence, oversights, blunders and at times even criminal behavior of others. The problem with material-technical supply, the mistakes in planning the combat operations on the whole and in separate operations, the shortcomings in controlling the forces, the leadership of the country and the Red Army’s Supreme Command tried to resolve at the expense of the “human factor”. The striving to achieve victory “at any cost”, at the expense of enormous human losses does not give evidence of the ability to fight according to Suvorov’s dictum – “Not with numbers, but by skill.” The acquisition of combat experience by the Red Army command and the leadership of the country came at too high a price.

Alman Zaferi Bafi1945 (talk) 19:18, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Casualties

504,569 sanitary (?) on Russian side, what does that exactly mean ? wounded, ill ... ? we have no further explanations for half a million soldiers. 91.182.248.223 (talk) 12:07, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

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:

• Bt7 6.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:32, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think that we should be trusting Gerasimova on her casualty figures. Her numbers were purely extrapolated from her own belief and estimate based on the destruction of the surrounding towns. Her information is completely fictional and holds no value. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:2403:BBF5:3981:FE73:8A20:D30A (talk) 19:36, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Summary in introduction

I read much of the article and still don't have a big picture of who attacked whom, when and why, and what the results were, except for "January 8, 1942, and March 31, 1943", in the introduction and, buried late in the article, the conclusion that the Germans withdrew from a salient. The map gives little idea of the geography, such as why it was considered a German salient, and after reading I still have no idea. The overall casualties for the Soviets and Germans are buried in the article (admittedly, they are speculative). All this should be summarized in the introduction. Then the article should have a more detailed overview; the "Overview" section is nothing but a list of names and links and is virtually useless as an overview. Zaslav (talk) 05:07, 10 May 2022 (UTC)