Talk:65th Infantry Division (Wehrmacht)

Wehrmachtbericht
I reverted the restoration of the Wehrmachtbericht transcript & mention:. Please see recent RfC: Proposals regarding mentions in the Wehrmachtbericht, that requires a reliable secondary source for such a mention. The source being used -- Velten, Wilhelm. Vom Kugelbaum zur Handgranate: die Geschichte der 65 Infanterie Division. Kurt Vowinckel Verlag, Neckargemund, 1974. No ISBN. -- is not such a source. For example, please see. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:04, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * How does one check a dead link? The divisional history was written by a former officer of the division and details are supported by Blumenson, Nicholson and the other Allied "official historians" of the Italian campaign. Just because you don't like the politics of the publisher, should not invalidate the reliability of a book you apparently have not read.174.0.48.147 (talk) 17:45, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry that the linking was unclear; the [de] links to the German Wikipedia article. Here's the link directly: Vowinckel-Verlag. Please establish the suitability of this source at Reliable sources/Noticeboard. --K.e.coffman (talk) 18:10, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Propaganda
Interestingly, given the dismissal of German military reports as mere 'propaganda', Martin Blumenson notes in his history of the Italian Campaign at least one military report by the 5th Army headquarters that, in his opinion, unfairly portrays the qualities of the German divisions in Italy. Perhaps dismissing certain sources out of hand while lionizing others is not the most effective way of building an unbiased picture...? 198.161.4.63 (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Which sources are being lionised? --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:43, 21 December 2018 (UTC)