Talk:Albert Severin Roche

OK, this article is "disputed"? Where's the dispute ... there's nothing here? RenaissongsMan 14:22, 11 September 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renaissongsman (talk • contribs)

Not that much information
there is not that much information on this great soldier who has been forgotten and sabaton history did a better talk about it than this wikipedia page if anyone can find more info on the first soldier please edit the page 2A02:C7C:2C1A:AB00:2D94:A8E6:6D70:28B3 (talk) 15:28, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Lack of reliability - Lacking citations and questionable sources
This article seems very heavily lacking in proper sources and citation, its general reliability suffers severely from it. I'd love to accept the statements listed in it as true, it makes for a good story, but in terms of the biographical history of the individual, the claims made here are a bit astounding for being on a Wikipedia article, and I don't see citations supporting most of them. The ones that are present seem to be lacking in reliability, according to preferred Wiki standards (Reliable sources / Verifiability). This all seems very much like a fabricated heroic tale, rather than documented by verified historical sources.

More specifically, examples such as: "By the end of the war, Albert had been wounded nine times and had personally captured 1,180 prisoners. At the end of the conflict, at 23, he was still a second-class soldier." go uncited and should be removed unless someone can document this. Moreover, accounts such as him overpowering his captors and taking 12 captives singlehandedly, while rescuing his wounded lieutenant, then continuing to take a total of 42 men captive in a single day, have citations I would consider iffy, as it doesn't seem clear where this information is derived from. The cited source is a single article on a website no longer hosted, by author Maurice Bourdon, who had a number of articles posted on the website, but beyond that I can not find any documentation as to where these claims are sourced from, nor how this story was retrieved or whether it is fabricated. I can not directly contact him through the website either, given that it is no longer actively hosted and therefore wouldn't forward emails through their internal service. I suppose one could attempt to find him online and reach out to investigate if he has officially documented sources this is derived from, but a quick Google search doesn't lead me to very easily find the author, and would require further digging to properly identify him.

In any case: I'm no seasoned editor, nor do I want to presumptuously massacre the article, so I'll hold off and refrain from removing parts of it for the moment, in case somebody can supply additional sources or information that can back up some of the information here. Hopefully someone has better luck than myself. Otherwise, I consider it obvious for the content to be slimmed down significantly. Rohero1 (talk) 11:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)