Talk:World War II

Social and Cultural Impact

War has had a significant impact on society and culture, including the role of women in the workforce, the effect on civilians, and the rise of propaganda. These aspects are only briefly mentioned, but could be expanded into a dedicated section. It is suggested that a new chapter entitled “Social and cultural impact” be added to explore these themes. SelimKarissa (talk) 02:14, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

The impact of World War II is currently covered in the article on the Aftermath of World War II. Dimadick (talk) 07:46, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2025

Please can I edit this page? TecinLendoPlay (talk) 17:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

not an edit request. Slatersteven (talk) 17:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

I request more commanders added to the list

Others don't need to add that much. I want to add:

18 Russian
16 American
15 British
 7 Chinese
16 German
15 Japanese
11 Italian Ze anish (talk) 21:47, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Don't be silly. Please also see the many previous discussions of the infobox: the current content reflects their outcomes. Nick-D (talk) 09:10, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

We have too many already. Slatersteven (talk) 11:30, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Wait really? Ze anish (talk) 19:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Per Nick-D. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:20, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

I suppose never mind Ze anish (talk) 22:38, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Polish border crossing picture

The picture description in the article is rather incorrect and should be adjusted to what was previously written here. The border crossing is being torn down by German Army soldiers and next to them are a couple of Danzig Schutzpolizei functionaries, those are the ones wearing the soft uniform covers.

Here are links to Getty Images and Alamy that contain the full description of the picture: https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/on-the-morning-of-1-september-1939-the-first-day-of-world-news-photo/548155991 and https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-german-soldiers-at-the-polish-border-1939-36999948.html. Also, the reference sources provided in the Wiki Commons description do make reference to both German soldiers and Danzig police being present.

Please adjust the description to correctly reflect the picture. 84.40.152.41 (talk) 19:21, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Per [1], found in the image's Commons documentation, I've corrected the caption to state that it was a reenactment photographed for propaganda purposes. This is the sort of image caption that might need a citation... Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 19:42, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Ed, the updated description still does not make mention of the German Army here. The two reference sources cited in the Wikipedia Commons image's documentation say: "...dokumentować sukcesy żołnierzy Wehrmachtu w dniu rozpoczęcia II wojny światowej. "[2] and "Zdjęcie przedstawiające łamanie polskiego szlabanu granicznego przez niemieckich żołnierzy".[3] So, the Wiki Commons description should also be corrected because it does not reflect what the cited reference sources say. The sources say that this is a propaganda photograph depicting German soldiers tearing down the border crossing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.40.152.41 (talk) 20:38, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Btw, I noticed that the English description of the picture in Wiki Commons reads: "Free City of Danzig police and custom officials reenact the removal of the Polish border crossing in Sopot on September 1, 1939.", while the Romanian version states: "Soldaţi germani distrugând punctul polonez de trecere a frontierei de la Sopot, în septembrie 1939." One says Danzig Police and the other German soldiers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.40.152.41 (talk) 20:44, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

The picture description should say: "A propaganda photo showing members of the German Army and Danzig Schutzpolizei reenacting the removal of the Polish border crossing in Sopot". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.40.152.41 (talk) 20:53, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Danzig did not invade Poland

Lova Falk and Ed can we get past the non-sense please? The photograph depicts German army soldiers and Danzig police functionaries (propaganda photo or not). This kind of editing that leave out the obvious, just makes Wikipedia look not very credible and open to criticism of inaccuracy, all you have to do is pull up YouTube videos on WWII or watch the History Channel to learn that Nazi Germany invaded Poland, stated in plain language. But, in the WWII Wikipedia article, which is mired in confusing details, the focus of a picture description is the Danzig police. I'm not really sure if this is being done on purpose or just a case of bad editing, but observing the editing style of this article, I'm especially critical of Ed's approach in this case because Ed highlights in his Wikipedia profile that his role in the Wikimedia Foundation is that of a Communications Specialist, so he should know better than to get side tracked on some secondary detail. Lucky for folks wanting to learn about WWII there are other sources than this Wikipedia article, which is bogged down in excruciating detail that fail to see the forest for the trees. --84.40.152.41 (talk) 08:16, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

84.40.152.41 I don't know why you coming at me this way. This picture with this caption has been in this article for a long time, and when Ed made a radical change to the caption without discussing it first on the Talk page, I reverted his edit. This is common WP editing. Now I am all open for a calm discussion about the correctness of the caption or other content in this page. So please, tell me which sentences or paragraph you would like to change and which sources you have to support those changes. Lova Falk (talk) 08:38, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

There seems to be a simple misunderstanding here. There is a discussion about this photo above. The commons documentation identifies the photo as depicting a reenactment by German soldiers and members of the Danzig police. I would suggest that we simply change the caption to: "German soldiers and members of the Danzig police reenact...etc." Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 09:05, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

You are quite right, I don't know how I missed this! Now I have edited to propaganda, with this source: https://germanhistorydocs.org/en/nazi-germany-1933-1945/ghdi:image-2001 Lova Falk (talk) 09:24, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Aemilius Adolphin Would you please scrutinise the results of my edits and change where you think they needed to be changed. I got a bit upset being accused of non-sense and wanting to do everything right, and instead, made mistakes. I will leave this page for now. Lova Falk (talk) 09:31, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Aemilius Adolphin and Lova Falk, one source which was used to back up the claim that this was just the Danzig police [4] shows the photo and cities Foto: fot. Wikipedia/domena publiczna. we are going in a citation loop. Can we use less speculative sources for this photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.40.152.41 (talk) 09:48, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

I have made the change. The Polish source states that it was just the Danzig police dressed as soldiers. But isn't it enough to simply state that it is a German proaganda reenactment? Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 09:54, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Aemilius Adolphin, but pls remove the citation currently in the image thumb caption, this is SYNTH. The picture in Wiki Commons is not from that source and that source is speculative in nature. Also, pls add these hyperlinks to make it easier to understand the context: "A German propaganda photograph reenacting the removal of the Polish border crossing at Sopot.

There is no issue of synthesis here. It is a caption of a photo with a reliable source for that caption.--Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 23:15, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Don't bring my job into this. It is very separate, and much newer, from this Wikipedia account. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 14:23, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Caption to Danzig Police at Polish Border photo

So, I decided to investigate this question, is this an authentic photo or not? When opening the photo from this page, it says: Soldiers of the Danzig Schutzpolizei tearing down the border crossing into Poland, 1 September 1939. However, in Wikimedia, in the Description, it says: Attention, the photo does not show the real situation of September 1, 1939. It is a staging of September 14, 1939 for the purposes of German propaganda and it gives two sources, one of them a blog, but the other one from the Polish radio: https://www.polskieradio.pl/10/512/artykul/715295,historyczna-fotografia-bylo-pozowana-ustawka. Also this source says that it is staged: https://germanhistorydocs.org/en/nazi-germany-1933-1945/german-soldiers-dismantle-a-polish-border-barrier-september-1-1939. So I will revert my undoing of Ed's edits, and include the sources. Lova Falk (talk) 09:05, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
PS I have also changed the caption for the photo in Wikimedia. Lova Falk (talk) 09:16, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Lova Falk, I would recommend adjusting the description to "A Nazi propaganda photograph showing German troops and Danzig functionaries tearing down the border crossing into Poland".

I had a chance to look over the history and the original description said: "Soldiers of the German Wehrmacht tearing down the border crossing into Poland, 1 September 1939". This description which was around for years got changed on 30 September 2024 by EUPBR. Other copies of this photograph on Wiki Commons from German Federal Archive[5] says German soldiers and this photo from the Imperial War Museums[6] say German troops. There is some speculation if these were German SS troops instead of German soldiers and instead of Danzig police its was Danzig customs guards. But, this is speculation official propaganda text said German soldiers and archived images also say this. In this case we don't want to start personal reaserch through synthesis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.40.152.41 (talk) 09:38, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

I have changed the text to simply state that it is a German reenactment for propaganda purposes. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 10:05, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Seems fair. Slatersteven (talk) 10:12, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

My mastery of the Polish language gained through Google translate tells me that the photograph was staged on 4 September and widely used in German newspapers. So I think the photo has value as an illustration of the very early German propaganda war over Poland. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 10:20, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Lova Falk, I assume you missed my comment above where I linked to the same Polish radio source I used when updating the caption, but thank you for further updating it. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 14:23, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes I did, my bad! Lova Falk (talk) 14:39, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

• I removed the photo with the edit summary: Do we really need a staged propaganda photo? How does this improve the readers understanding per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE? I also removed it as the simplest solution to this kafuffle. If we need an image here (there are already enough), there must be images that are accurate (not staged) and relevant to the invasion of Poland. Aemilius Adolphin reinstated the image with the summary: It shows that the Germans were engaged in a propaganda war. Please discuss on Talk. Per IMAGERELEVANCE: Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative. Each image in an article should have a clear and unique illustrative purpose and serve as an important illustrative aid to understanding. Using the photo might satisfy MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE if it were placed in a section on propaganda but this is about the invasion of Poland. Nowhere is propaganda mentioned in the section. Nowhere in the section is Danzig or Sopot mentioned. There is no clear link between Danzig and Sopot. There is zero IMAGERELEVANCE as the article stands. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:39, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

  The kerfuffle seems to have been settled by simply changing the caption and adding a reliable source. That said, if there is a consensus for removing it altogether or replacing it with a real image of Germany invading Poland I wouldn't care one way or the other. I just think there should be some discussion and consensus before an established image is removed. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 04:28, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

This is actually an infamous photograph that was widely shown in Germany during the invasion, and as Aemilius Adolphin mentioned the fact that it was propaganda also has value, as it played a key role in the conflict. @Aemilius Adolphin, perhaps it might be a good option to add hyperlink–Propaganda in World War II–to the word "propaganda" in the image caption, also include this hyperlink–Second Polish Republic–to "Polish border crossing" to show that Poland had very different borders during the interwar period. These are just a few helpful pointers for the reader to show a bit of context behind the photograph. Otherwise, I'm fine with the new picture description.

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2025

Please, add France and Charles de Gaulle with the great winners of World War II. It’s just a historical fact…

Of course, without USA and UK, we probably wouldn’t be free today. But, our soldiers fought a lot during all the war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1210:7691:1300:5DEB:5D30:25B4:1C67 (talk) 22:31, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I can look into this, but you need to do more first. Please tell me in which sentence, or which paragraph they should be added, and please also provide a source. Lova Falk (talk) 07:02, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2025

Please add Charles de Gaulle in the « main Allied leaders » ! 2A02:1210:7691:1300:484C:1E52:FCB8:76DA (talk) 01:02, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Not done for now: Please provide sources. Warriorglance(talk to me) 05:59, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2025

Please, add Charles de Gaulle and France into the Allies. 2A02:1210:7691:1300:CDA9:A343:1DF5:E900 (talk) 01:27, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

France is listed as one of the Allies in the article and in the link in the Info Box. As for including de Gaulle as a major allied leader, this has been discussed many times and the consensus is not to include him. You can see the previous discussions in the Talk Page archives above. If you think you have identified several recent scholarly sources which state that de Gaulle was a major allied commander and leader you can begin another Talk page discussion on the topic citing these sources. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 01:40, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2025

Add nanjing massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanjing_Massacre to genocide examples 104.245.226.192 (talk) 04:03, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: The Nanjing Massacre is mentioned, and so are Japanese war crimes in the Far East as crimes against humanity. That is what the scope of the article (largely picking up in 1939) allows us to do. Remsense ‥ 论 04:18, 4 April 2025 (UTC)