Talk:War crimes against Germans on the Eastern Front

Edits by User:Feldwebel
After reviewing this user's edits, I have these concerns:


 * Substantial content was removed. Not always a bad thing, but it is not usually unnecessary.  Feldwebel also deleted entire sections seemingly without reason. diff diff
 * Intellectual dishonesty. This is unacceptable.  Feldwebel has altered cited information while leaving citations in order to make it appear as though reputable sources support erroneous claims. diff diff
 * Introduction of the claim that the Allies considered all Germans to be Nazis without evidence. diff
 * Repeated increase in reporting the number of women raped without supporting sources. diff diff
 * Referring to Soviet soldiers as Russian. diff

The revisions made by Feldwebel lack supporting sources and correlate strongly with Nazi sympathetic views on the subject, including through their exaggeration of rape statistics and total removal of historical context. Lieutenant S., Geschichtmeister des Lexipedium (talk) 12:46, 8 September 2014 (EDT)


 * I deleted sections because there was a lot of stuff that wasn't relevant or was trying to blame German women for being raped. Supposed crimes against Russians don't belong in this page about Germans.  Most of those crimes were made up anyway by the Russians to justify what they did.  The Wehrmacht acted very professionally and did not commit the crimes that the Nazis did.  The rape statistics are very low in this page.  If you read anything about mass rape by Russian soldiers, it is clear that they raped almost all of the women they came across repeatedly.  I never tried to falsify sources either.  I just changed parts that were inaccurate.  Feldwebel (talk) 15:17, 8 September 2014 (EDT)
 * Here are sources that support facts that are wrong on this page:
 * www.holocaustianity.com/human-loot.html
 * www.liveleak.com/view?i=756_1300383585
 * www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1254521/German-victim-break-silence-Red-Army-rapists-65-years.html
 * www.theguardian.com/books/2002/may/01/news.features11
 * library.flawlesslogic.com/massrape.htm
 * rense.com/general19/redarmy.htm
 * libcom.org/library/left-rape-why-we-should-all-be-ashamed-left%E2%80%99s-role-covering-rape-2-million-women
 * historyimages.blogspot.com/2011/10/mass-rape-of-german-women-when-germany.html
 * hitlernews.cloudworth.com/mass-rapes-by-red-army.php
 * Apparently the Russians raped 12 million women and they did rape young girls. You can find everything there.  Feldwebel (talk) 11:53, 9 September 2014 (EDT)
 * Several of those website are blatantly Nazi supporting and the rest can hardly be considered reliable. We usually don't accept internet sources unless they are on the .edu domain, and even then, there's still a chance that the page was written by a student or may in some way not be reputable.
 * I will give you a warning about using Nazi sources and supporting Nazi POV. You are free to present sources for unpopular opinions as long as you do not engage in edit warring or persistently reverted revisions in articles, but persistently pushing Nazi sympathetic POV will not be tolerated.  I suggest that you find reputable sources to support your claims or work on writing other articles, which are in need.  Lieutenant S., Geschichtmeister des Lexipedium (talk) 13:02, 9 September 2014 (EDT)
 * Those sources (barring the Nazi ones) might not be reliable but they say the truth about the rape by the Red Army. This page has extremely under exaggerated statistics and suggests openly that the German women got what they deserved.  Everything that makes that claim should at least be deleted.  Feldwebel (talk) 14:26, 9 September 2014 (EDT)
 * There is nothing in the page that suggests that Germans got what they deserved. If the sources that you present are not reliable, then they cannot be used to make statements in the article.  Lieutenant S., Geschichtmeister des Lexipedium (talk) 14:43, 9 September 2014 (EDT)
 * The page repeatedly says that the Germans got what they deserved because they supposedly did war crimes in Russia. Many of those sources are based on other reliable sources.  It is obvious from any review of the subject that your claims are exaggeratedly low.  All the claims that German women deserved to be raped need to go.  Feldwebel (talk) 10:30, 17 September 2014 (EDT)
 * If those websites use reliable sources, then you must present those sources. It is your responsibility to provide sources that are reliable; you should not expect anyone else to do so for you.  Until you provide non fringe sources that support your claims, the article will remain as sources have dictated.  Once again you have removed cited information without presenting counter sources.  That is unacceptable.  Lieutenant S., Geschichtmeister des Lexipedium (talk) 14:21, 17 September 2014 (EDT)

Gertjejanssen misquoted
In Footnote 8 states that rape was used by the Nazis as a weapon and Gertjejanssen is the source for this claim. Yet Gertjejanssen claims in her abstract the following: "Although rape was not a formal military tactic by either army, there was a tacit understanding that men had a right to rape. Partisans also were known to rape. These examples support the notion that many women were victims of rape, and that females in general feared sexual violence, less so from members of a particular military or cultural group, but from armed men in general, emphasizing the importance of gender." There is also the claim that Gertjejanssen says that there were 10 million rapes committed by the Germans (footnote 9). This claim I could not find. I propose that the aforementioned passages be changed so that they reflect what Gertjejanssen actually wrote. Maki (talk) 14:45, 17 September 2014 (EDT)
 * Alterations have been made. Feldwebel (talk) 15:58, 17 September 2014 (EDT)
 * As a further edit, I fully removed the 10 million figure. When a statistic is shown to be inaccurate, please remove it entirely, do not simply try to cast doubt onto it.  Lieutenant S., Geschichtmeister des Lexipedium (talk) 16:20, 17 September 2014 (EDT)
 * Because the sources have been called into question, shouldn't we take out some of the debated claims in the page? Feldwebel (talk) 01:34, 23 September 2014 (EDT)
 * No. That was one detail out of the entire article.  Nothing about the remaining sources is in any way questionable.  Dewey (talk) 13:24, 26 September 2014 (EDT)

Deletion proposal of the revisionism section
This section focuses on a subject that is not the topic of Lexipedium. If there is agreement with this, I will remove the section. Lieutenant S., Geschichtmeister des Lexipedium (talk) 16:23, 17 September 2014 (EDT)