Talk:Sinyavino offensive (1942)

A couple of suggestions
Overall, I think this is a B class article. I have a couple of suggestions for further improvement:
 * expand the lead to summarise the article completely;
 * format the References section with cite book template;
 * (as per the comment on the [|Assessment Request page]), I think the article probably should be renamed from Operation Northern Light to either "Battle of Sinyavin" or "Sinyavin offensive";
 * you could try to add a few more wikilinks to some of the units involved if they have articles, or maybe create some stubs if they don't exist and if you are really keen.
 * possibly add a few more citations (e.g to the last sentence in Soviet subsection of Background; last sentence in Stalemate September 10-19 section; and first and last sentences of Aftermath section).

Anyway, good effort so far. Thanks for your contribution. — AustralianRupert (talk) 22:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Also would it be possible to get German strength and casualty figures? Cheers. Anotherclown (talk) 23:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I have done the lead expansion, using cite book, adding more citations and linking to existing military units. I will add German strength and casualties when I get back one of my books (Siege of Leningrad by Glantz) I have a couple of questions:


 * How do I change the article name?
 * There does not seem to be a military navigation template for Soviet Divisions, should I create one?D2306 (talk) 15:07, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You can change the article name, by moving the article. This can be done by clicking on the "Move" tab at the top of the screen when viewing the article and then typing in the new name that you want the article moved to. This will then move the text to the new name and create a redirect from this page to the other (take a look at How_to_move_a_page first, though). In regards to the second question, I can't see any problems with that if you're keen to do so. — AustralianRupert (talk) 15:43, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Move history
I notice that the history of this page is all over the place.

When it was written in March 2006 it was called Operation Northern Lights and was about a US operation in Iraq. Contrariwise, the information about the two German offensives was at Operation Nordlicht, which was cut and pasted there on in September 2009, then moved to Operation Northern Light. This was then re-written in January to cover a Soviet offensive, and moved to its current title, and the information on the US and the German offensives was mostly lost.

With the benefit of hindsight it would have made more sense to a)leave ONLs alone, b) move ON straight to ONL, and c) write about Sinyavin on its own page. But, we will know better next time. Meanwhile I’ve restored the the stuff about the US and the German offensives to their previous pages, with links to the edit history here. Xyl 54 (talk) 19:20, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

PS This article is pretty good, BTW; a useful addition. Does anyone know if the Soviet operation had a name?Xyl 54 (talk) 19:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The Soviet operation was called "Sinyavin Offensive Operation" "Синявинская наступательная операция", as it appears under Krivosheev. Many soviet offensives were named after notable battle locations. With regard to the page history, I agree that the US operation in Iraq needs its own page, but the German planned operation operation and the Soviet offensive are essentially the same battle.D2306 (talk) 02:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The information about the 1944 Operation Nordlicht needs a page, but it also needs a reference. All information in the two paragraphs about the 1942 Nordlicht is in this already in this article.D2306 (talk) 02:49, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Part of the reason I asked about the operation name was that I wondered if it was an aspect of the Uranus/Mars plans, but when I checked there I got more confused than ever. But “essentially the same battle”? I don’t know exactly what the Germans had in mind, but I’m pretty sure this wasn’t it.
 * As for Operation Northern Light, there’s a fair bit wrong with the page, but it should probably be discussed over there. The 1944 stuff could go to its own page and make ONL a disambiguation, for example, though I’d favour keeping it for now. There’s nothing untoward about having separate pages for operational plans and actual battles, if they don’t completely overlap. Xyl 54 (talk) 15:44, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Introduction
I've changed the header around; the focus of the article is the Soviet offensive, so that should be mentioned first. In fact I'm wondering whether the mention of the German operation is appropriate in the lead at all, now. The co-incidence of them is important, but maybe not for the opening sentence; what do you think? Xyl 54 (talk) 19:28, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the German operation needs to be covered in the lead, as it was the build up of forces for this operation, which allowed the German side to halt the Soviet. I am not sure if it needs to be in the first sentence now.D2306 (talk) 02:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Soviet Losses
the figures are almost exactly twice the numbers reported by Krivoshyev, yet are claimed to be based on his research. moreover there is no mention of the fact that Soviet Irrecoverable lossesBold text is a category which includes invalids as well as the dead or missing. The result is a striking inflation. Momentarily I will leave the figures as they stand. However, If I receive no reply, explaining the discrepancy, I will change themSoz101 (talk) 02:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The numbers given:40,085 dead and missing (including 12,000 captured) 73,589 wounded are exactly what they are in the source for the the Sinyavin Offensive (number 21 under the frontal operations list at the bottom). You may be confusing it with the 8.1-20.4.42 Volkhov Offensive.
 * Also the irrecoverable losses does not include invalids. Please see Table 120 in the book. Irrecoverable losses is dead or missing (both combat and non-combat) D2306 (talk) 18:03, 21 March 2010 (UTC)