Talk:Battle of Wizna

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article 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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (nations and regions): Polish military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): World War II task force

I was not sure whether I should call this battle a German victory, German defeat or a draw. That's why I chose "unconcluded". Three days of heavy fighting with 40:1 odds is not what I'd call a German victory... [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 08:11, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

Halibutt, what are your sources for Guderian threatening of shooting Polish PoWs ?Szopen 11:38, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Sadly, I don't remember. It might've been his memoirs, but I'm not sure. If that's really important I could check it. Halibutt 14:01, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

No, it's not his memories. I had not seen this in any other www site (Except those basing on wikipedia). I remember that I saw it somewhere, I even thought it was me who added that info to wikipedia, but I can't remember where. Szopen 07:02, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Nie wydaje Wam się, że opis "unconcluded" jest trochę mylący ? Polskie pozycje zostały zdobyte, bitwę wygrali Niemcy. Może nie tak szybko jakby chcieli, ale jednak wygrali. Ktoś mógłby pomyśleć, że mimo stosunku sił 1:40 Polacy się obronili ;)

Please use English, this is English Wiki. For other readers: anon is disputing the 'unconcluded' result, as Poles were defeated, after all.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 14:17, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I believe we could go either way here. After all the German objective was to blitz the Polish positions and the Polish objective was to hold out for as long as possible. And in fact the Poles held out even longer than planned while the Germans did not blitz the Polish positions. They finally broke through, but... after three days. It's somehow similar to the Finnish war of 1939/1940 - at the end the Soviets broke their resistance and achieved their goals, though some half a year later than planned and with unbelievable losses. Halibutt 16:32, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

But still Battle at Thermopylae is named "Persian victory" (sorry, my english is very poor). Also, if Kiev offensive have to be "polish defeat" - everything is possible ;) Maybe sometimes better to not fill up this <rubryka>. Always be POV.. Sorry for my english again.

Your English is fine. Feel free to use Polish if you cannot express yourself in English, but judging by the above post, you are doing fine. You may want to expand the Polish version of this article (and create a Wikipedia account).--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 03:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd also say this was a german victory, if the germans had huge losses, then it would be pyrrhic victory, but victory nonetheless. If you just compare casualties and speak about ratios when deciding winner, we should declare germany winner of WW2 with same logic.

I checked battle of thermopylae, and it was counted as Persian victory so no one should have any argues with german victory here. While this could've been thought as strategical defeat for germany, i think it isn't even that because aftermath shows that germans were able to destroy more polish troops after battle of wizna even though they were delayed for some time.