Talk:Legion of French Volunteers Against Bolshevism/Archives/2022/June

Comments on copyedit
I've added some tags where I can't understand what the meaning is and  where I can't tell what the source is.
 * "amid continuing Vichy opposition" would this be more precisely phrased "due to Vichy opposition"? Or is the Vichy opposition only one reason?
 * I would try to reduce the use of blockquote unless there's a very good reason. In particular, the Beyda quote would be better paraphrased imo.
 * Some of the stuff in the second note looks like it might be better in the text.
 * You say there were only two battalions and then that there were three at one point between the end of "Siege of Moscow" section and beginning of the next section.
 * Try to be consistent with false titles: either "historian XX" or "the historian XX". The latter is preferred in BrE, or so I'm told.
 * The use of passive voice is excessive. Sentences like "the dismantling of the LVF had already been ordered", "it was hoped that numbers could be made up by drafting in Turkmen hiwis", "The recruits had been promised", or "The LVF was ambushed" should say who is ordering, hoping, promising, and ambushing. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  09:48, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks Buidhe. I have made a few edits and will work through the changes properly over the next week or so. —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:35, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Undoing archive because I don't think all these issues have been fixed; we still have "was recalled", "Legion was again deployed", etc. It's better to specify who made these decisions if that information is available. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  07:39, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks Buidhe. I share your frustration at some of the passive voice in the article but I am afraid that the sources are usually the limiting factor. Crudely, I think it is fair to say that historians of the LVF come at it from the French side and are less interested by how it fitted into a wider German context meaning that they tend to be vague on exactly when, why, or how developments occurred. As you will see though, the article remains under construction to some extent but I hope is getting closer to GA submission. —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:17, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Glad to see improvement, we're running a GAN drive in June if that matters. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  09:18, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Great! Yes, I'll try to get it nominate in the next week or so then. —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

On sources: Soutou 2000 is available with help of WP:TWL here. I have an electronic copy of The French Who Fought for Hitler and send you parts of it if desired. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  09:36, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I'm not sure there are many other sources to use. The French Who Fought for Hitler is mostly about the Charlemagne Division isn't it? As the personnel of the LVF will have been merged into Charlemagne, I don't think there's a huge benefit in having an extensive consideration of post-war veterans' politics and the épuration légale. —Brigade Piron (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You're right that it mostly doesn't cover this organization, but I managed to add a bit of info from them. Also, this source says "After fighting one “real” battle against the Red Army at Bobr, near the Berezina River, they regrouped in Greifenberg, in Pomerania. Disbanded in November 1944, the LVF became part of the newly created Division Charlemagne." The article gives the disbandment date as September 1944. Which is correct?
 * Other possibly useful info about the LVF:
 * "The legionaries rarely talk about their family situation, and most of them were too young to have families or even steady partners when they enrolled in the LVF (p. 69)"


 * "Making a more balanced judgment, [Kenneth] Estes distinguishes between the performances of the Sturmbrigade Frankreich, the LVF, and the Charlemagne. For him, the Frankreich showed that volunteer units “could fight as first-rate troops when provided with proper weapons and comprehensive training.” The LVF, on the other hand, “failed miserably,” and the “unlucky” Charlemagne, sent to Pomerania without artillery and supply columns, could not even do what it was supposed to do – maintain “the continuity of the front”(p.21)"


 * "The memoirs of the LVF men who fought in Belorussia (including Labat’s) are unanimous on one point: The partisans were merciless with the volunteers, whom they did not just kill after ambushing them, but often stripped and mutilated. (p. 58)"


 * "When they begin the narrative of their experiences in Belorussia, the volunteers are prompt to emphasize that they were at first well received by the local population. For one thing, the Germans had taken measures that peasants could only approve; decollectivizing the agricultural system and allowing religious practices, they had redistributed the land and reopened the churches (Dallin 347). The French had applied the same policies with positive results, (p. 71) ... Whether people in Belorussia and the Ukraine are “naturally” hospitable or were merely trying to adjust to the new conditions, the idyllic situation described by Bassompierre and Philippet did not last for long. The first cause for the quick deterioration of the relations between the locals and the occupying armies was the tendency of the soldiers to supplement their food rations by requisitioning meat, fruit, and vegetables from the peasants, or merely by stealing edibles from them. (p. 72)"


 * "Jean-Paul Brunet, in his biography of Doriot, mentions that in the fall of 1942, the Germans deemed the LVF’s repressive policies toward the civilian population to have gone too far. They ordered several legionaries tried because they had “shot children, raped women, and stolen horses” (411); four of them were executed despite the protests of their officers, who argued without success that the volunteers’ behavior had not been different from most German soldiers’ (p. 73)"


 * There's considerably more relevant content to quote but I don't want to fall afoul of copyright rules. He also mentions a photo album Les Archives Keystone de la LVF, which, assuming licensing worked out, could be helpful to include. The official magazine of the LVF was apparently called Le Combattant Européen (p.50), which merits a mention in this article imo. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  18:19, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this. I'll try to add some of it to the article. Bene states that the LVF was officially disbanded on 1st September 1944 (1). —Brigade Piron (talk) 19:09, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Clarifications
Several people associated with the LVF claimed in their memoirs that LVF fought at the Borodino battle site in order to highlight the fact that it followed Bonaparte's footsteps. Beyda proved that this claim is a myth since LVF was not present in the vicinity of Borodino when fighting took place there. Beyda's comments (the ones you removed) mentioned in Romanko's article are all cited, including the exact page numbers of Beyda's book where this information can found.--Catlemur (talk) 00:51, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for explaining. I have reinstated the Beyda citation - apologies. I'm not sure whether the Borodino anecdote is strictly notable. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:12, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Content of articles does not need to be notable, only WP:DUE. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  15:15, 23 June 2022 (UTC)