Talk:Soviet Navy surface raids on Western Black Sea

New proposal of name and content
Given the explains provided in the below text (no direct connection established in literature with Soviet Navy operations in Black Sea and Stalingrad Battle). I would propose a series of alternative names and content data: A) Soviet Black Sea Fleet surface operations in Black Sea B) Surface operations in Black Sea during WW2 C) Surface naval warfare in Black Sea during WWW2

Removal of contents: Soviet submarine actions and Axis anti-submarine operations (already covered in separate pages: 1941, 1942, 1943 and 1944).

Addition of contents: 1) Short recap of 1941 Battle of Costanta (link to the extensive article iserted) 2) Recaps of Soviet surface shelling and support for Odessa and Sevastopol (the real strategic aim of Soviet Navy in Black Sea in 1941-1943, not the Battle of Stalingrad), recap of Soviet surface ship actions supporting the Battle of the Kerch Peninsula 3) Soviet ship offensive minelaying in Romanian coast 3) Romanian defensive anti-ship minelaying in Romanian coast (excluding submarines, but detailing cruiser Voroshilov's damage) 4) Gathering of the 3 minors Soviet destroyers raid occurred in 1942 in front off Romanian coast 5) Italian attack on Molotov cruiser 6) Final loss of 3 Soviet destroyers due Luftwaffe and ends of Soviet major warships activity  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lupodimare89 (talk • contribs) 14:06, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Status of Changes: I re-shaped the article focusing on the bulk of operations as offensive raids in western black Sea water. (name title changed in accordance with text). Removed text from Submarine warfare (the text was actually a copy of the already presented text and references in 1941, 1942 submarine operations). Siege of Odessa and Siege of Sevastopol mentioned in article, but they have already their own pages: moreover Soviet navy engaged in ground shelling/amphibious landing. While this article recap the Soviet offensive Raids and the Axis defense against surface actions. No other actions occurred according literature: it consisted in 1) Raid of Costanta (1941), 2) Minelaying offensive (1941), 3) three separate raids in late 1942. Result changed from "Indecisive" to "Axis defensive success": The Soviet Navy failed to intercept-sink merchants and convoys as intended and suffered losses (Moskva and damages to others). I would have not wrote "Axis Victory" because (especially in 1942) the main German-Romanian strategy was passive (radio-station intercept and calling back merchants), also Soviet minelaying operations sunk some merchants and warships but this is not mentioned as a significant success anywhere.

I will work on separate new pages for Molotov's attack and the German success agains the Soviet flottilla in 1943 because both incidents occurred on geographical different places (and with different Soviet strategical aims: shelling of Crimea) Lupodimare89 (talk) 14:11, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Remove or incorporate this page?
It seems to me this page could be removed/incorporate with this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_warfare_in_the_Black_Sea_campaigns_(1941%E2%80%9342) For a number of reasons: naval warfare alone was quite a separate action than the (far distant) Battle of Stalingrad, moreover Soviet and Axis forces were fighting also in on the Black Sea coast at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lupodimare89 (talk • contribs) 16:52, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I would be inclined to agree. I've been planning to gather together the available information on all the related articles we have on naval warfare in the Black Sea anyway, in order to cut down on all these inconsistently-organized separate articles that we have. Alcherin (talk) 18:34, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I should explain. You see, the Battle of Stalingrad was a big thing. It affected things around it. The Romanian Navy sank a total of 16 Soviet submarines. So, as you can see, half of them were sunk during this battle, indicating a rather fitting spiking up in Soviet activity during this period. Moreover, Axis sea convoys carried supplies for frontline troops, thus contributing significantly to land operations. Finally, I would like to point out that the two naval raids in December, were the first time since 1941 when Soviet surface ships ventured near the Romanian coast. Now what could possibly embolden the Soviets enough to risk their third most powerful warship in the Black Sea? Probably a crushing victory scored against the Romanian ground troops merely a week before (Operation Uranus). Brown Water Admiral (talk) 21:07, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * So effectively this is a WP:CONTENTFORK off of Battle of Stalingrad? What you just explained above needs to be added into the current article with a reliable source, to give what is currently a list of engagements within a certain timeframe (that of the Battle of Stalingrad) sufficient context to explain their significance to the battle. Otherwise we could just have the engagements listed on one of the other relevant pages and a short summary and link on Battle of Stalingrad. Alcherin (talk) 21:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah but...why? This is not unprecedented. Things related to the Battle of Stalingrad that are big enough to be addressed in separate articles do get them, and it doesn't seem to be any issue. The Romanian Army played a big part in the battle, so it got its own article. The order of battles, for both the Axis and the Allies, got their own articles. So did the commanders. So why wouldn't the naval stuff worth its own article? I would rather have a fleet of cruisers than a Yamato, if you get the analogy. Brown Water Admiral (talk) 22:02, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Because the examples you listed are more notable topics. There's entire books that have detailed and in-depth coverage of the Romanian armies at Stalingrad, or the commanders involved at Stalingrad. As far as I am aware these are absent for Stalingrad-related naval engagements. Indeed I don't think many sources even tie in naval engagements that happened in the same time period as Stalingrad to their narrative about Stalingrad, and though the naval engagements might well have been related to Stalingrad in real life, we can't say that it is when reliable sources don't make that connection. Alcherin (talk) 16:47, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

The Battle of Stalingrad was one episode of the quite huge warfare on the eastern front. The naval campaigns on 1941 were first and foremost focused on supporting the operations during the battles for Odessa, Crimea and Sevastopol, campaigns on Kerch peninsula (between 1941 and 1942) and then again offensives and counter-offensive in Crimea. Naval operations (on both sides, Axis and Soviets) focused on these actions. The Battle of Stalingrad involved only ground supplies from Axis and Soviet sides used only a bit of the Volga riverine forces. To relate the Battle of Stalingrad with the Naval Warfare in Black Sea it seems to me quite extreme. Lupodimare89 (talk) 01:15, 22 November 2017 (UTC) The Battle of Stalingrad begun in August 1942. Exactly what kind of intensification of operation you mean? The first year of war involved submarines arranging attacks on the Romanian/Bulgarian coast, yes. And BTW Soviet lost exactly 20 submarines during this first year of war (sinking 23 Axis/Turkish vessels). The rest of the Navy was absorbed by the Battle of Odessa and Battle of Sevastopol. The lull of Soviet submarines offensive was during the end of the Battle of Sevastopol because submarines were used to transport supplies to the city: this is reflected by having only 4 submarines lost between January-August (sinking 8 Axis/Turkish vessels). The second half of 1942 Soviets lost other 8 submarines (sinking 6 Axis/Turkish vessels) and while this match with the events of the Battle of Stalingrad, to me it seems hardly connected: let's remember the Axis shipping also supplied the forces spread on the Crimea front. And speaking of this, the whole 1943 in Black Sea was fully absorbed by the Kuban campaign first, and eventually the Kerch-Eltigen Operation in November 1943 (1943 was a particularly good year for Soviet subs: only 3 submarines lost for sinking 19 Axis/Turkish vessels). The last year of war in Black Sea was obviously focused on the German evacuation of Crimea: Soviets lost 4 submarines for 6 targets destroyed. All considered, I do not see a correlation with the Battle of Stalingrad in particular: the Soviet Navy itself was absorbed in Black Sea by other campaigns, and the Submarines indeed acted quite indipendently from war plans (coordination by different military branches was not particularly great from Soviet side). Concerning Soviet submarine losses in Black Sea, the bulk of them has been lost by Axis minefields (most but not all lof them Romanian-laid). Germans indeed sunk M-31 (by subchaser UJ-116), ShCh-216 (by UJ-103 and UJ-106), L-6 (by UJ-104). 2 units were lost by Italians: ShCh-214 by MAS-571 and ShCh-203 by CB-4 (the only istance in WW2 of submarine-vs-submarine sinking in Black Sea). Romanian successes by surface units consists in ShCh-206 (by Viforul&Viscolul)and MAYBE M-118 by Ghigulescu and Sithi Eugen but it is more likely she was sunk by a German BV-138 seaplane. Sorry, I have not exactly understood your line as "the very out of place surface Soviet offensive operations near the Axis coast". Soviet conducted multiple shelling attacks from sea during the whole 1942 against Ukraine and Crimea cities too but how this is connected with the Battle of Stalingrad is obscure to me, especially since many of these attacks were directed toward ground shelling of local German forces in Crimea. Soviet ships (including destroyers and cruisers) operated almost no-stop since June 1941 until the loss of 3 destroyers on October 1943 due German air attack. Lupodimare89 (talk) 19:46, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I do not think it is that extreme, considering what I explained above. I seriously doubt it's a coincidence that Soviet operations intensified so much during this battle. Their submarines doing all in their power to harass Axis supplies, hence why half of the subs sunk by the Romanian Navy were lost in this period. Actually, perhaps some were also sunk by the German Navy, which I will check and add them to the article if it's the case. Thus, half of the Soviet submarine losses in the three-years-long Black Sea Campaigns, would occur during the timeframe of this battle. Plus the very out of place surface Soviet offensive operations near the Axis coast. Between late-1941 the early-1944, this is the only time such actions take place. I am merely connecting the dots. Brown Water Admiral (talk) 06:05, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Connecting the dots when reliable sources don't make that connection is original research, see my reply above. Alcherin (talk) 16:52, 28 November 2017 (UTC)