Talk:Malmedy massacre

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Malmedy massacre article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 2 months

Military history: European / German / North America / United States / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

Belgium C‑class Mid‑importance

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 17, 2004, December 17, 2005, December 17, 2006, December 17, 2007, December 17, 2009, December 17, 2012, and December 17, 2015.

Death of Peiper

The sentence "Peiper's charred corpse was later found in the ruins with a bullet in his chest." does not corrode with what is stated on the article on Peiper, that says he died of smoke inhalation and only his own guns were fired. -Valberg.81.191.94.128 (talk) 01:42, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit

Preserving here by providing this link; my rationale was: "contrary to events as commonly understood". Further, prisoners were attempting to escape generally comes from apologist sources, including from Peiper himself; see Jens Westemeier (2007) Joachim Peiper, p. 147. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:58, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Last survivor of the Malmedy massacre

https://local21news.com/news/local/mount-joy-wwii-veteran-honored-with-letter-from-president-trump

Is it worth updating the link to Harold Billow? He's now 97.

Yes, most definitely - nice to see some good news. Thank you for the suggestion.— Diannaa (talk) 22:10, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harold Billow passed away recently, I think he deserves a minor section in the article. Nate Rybner 05:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naterybner (talk • contribs)

Numbers killed by Kampfgruppe Peiper

IP editor. I really don't understand your point. You seem to want to state categorically and solely that KP was responsible for between 538 and 749 US deaths without

agreeing that this was a post-war figure presented to the senate in 1949
acknowledging that others have come up with different figures

If you are insisting on using a contemporaneous figure then it's up to you to provide a source for that figure and for it to be clear this was a contemporaneous figure based on whatever methodology was used at the time. At the moment you are using the 1949 report to the senate as the source.

It is not anachronistic to discuss the numbers killed regardless of when the formation of opinions occurred. Nthep (talk) 15:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Context

Surely the article should mention the fact Allied soldiers regularly murdered unarmed German POWs? Patton covered up the killings of German POWs in Italy. (86.135.242.61 (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC))[reply]

If reliable sources explicitly relate that to the Malmedy massacre, perhaps, with due weight. Avoid original research, especially synthesis. (Hohum ^@) 19:13, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We don't want to give the impression that the Malmedy massacre was somehow justified because the Allied forces also committed similar acts. That's an inappropriate thing to imply. — Ninja Diannaa (Talk) 21:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is rather hypothetical, but if reliable sources explicitly state, for instance, that it was a motivation, then it should be in the article, with due weight. I doubt such sources exist. My point being that article content shouldn't be based on sensibilities, but on sources. (Hohum ^@) 01:17, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]