Talk:Operation Silver Fox

New campaignbox

Please see discussion here. Andreas 08:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Scandinavia in World War II

Restored this template as it's intended to include major WWII operations across all Scandinavian/ Nordic countries - as defined by the Nprdic task force and the article on Scandinavia. It includes more than just Norway! Folks at 137 17:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merger Continuation War#Advance in Northern Finland/Operation Silver Fox.

This proposal was made on 18 June 2007, but there doesn’t seem much enthusiasm for it; I can’t find any opinion anywhere about it.
I am removing the Merge proposal here, and there.
I would be opposed to a merger, particularly from there to here; The advance in Northern Finland was bigger than Silver Fox, (which was just the German operation in that theatre), and covered a longer time period.
Also, the Advance… section deals with Finnish actions, in the context of their Continuation War, whilst Silver Fox has the German context.
I am posting this message there also.
Xyl 54 (talk) 16:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

It will need to be moved eventually since the Operation name was not Silver Fox, the advance was an offensive, and the offensive was not in Northern Finland, but the Kola peninsula or Lapland as Finns would have it--mrg3105mrg3105 23:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

To clarify: "Advance in Northern Finland" was the name of the section in the Continuation War article, which the merger proposal refrerred to. Xyl 54 (talk) 11:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Misleading

This is misleading:
'This operation was to take place well above the Arctic Circle and would therefore be hampered by dreadful terrain and weather'.
Murmansk has a continental climate, ameliorated by the North Atlantic Current. The average summer temerature is 14C (57F), which certainly isn't 'dreadful'; it just makes for a short campaigning season. Xyl 54 (talk) 18:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

And so is this:
'The German-Finnish supplies had to come overland from the nearest railhead, some 531 km. The Soviets were only 60 km from the port of Murmansk'.
Kirkenes is about 50km from Petsamo; Petsamo is about 10km from where the border use to be. Both are ports accessible to sea traffic along the Norwegian coast. And good staff work would have ensured a build-up of supplies for the operation, which was planned 8 months before it started. The forces in North Africa managed to do far more in similar circumstances. Xyl 54 (talk) 18:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Editing

There is someone else who may be editing the articles on this sector of the Eastern Front (World War II). Are you interested in editing? I'm working on the larger Eastern Front project and can assist with structuring and sources.--mrg3105mrg3105 23:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Probably me; and Yes; and Thanks. Xyl 54 (talk) 11:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Excuses, excuses

The more I read this, the more irritating it gets; the Twin Assaults section is a just mass of excuses.
“they were frightened of the trees”?! Your kidding!
If you want to say that the terrain favoured the defence, or that the operation was at the end of a long and tenuous supply line, or that the Germans failed to ensure numerical superiority, then fine.
But at the end of the day, they were stopped by Russian resistance; “Nord” lost 700 men in two days, so someone was shooting at them.
Unless there are any objections I’m planning to re-write this section, with a little less bleating. Xyl 54 (talk) 12:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, done. Xyl 54 (talk) 17:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Non-English

I've replaced all the German words in this, because:-
It’s inappropriate: This is the English language WP, so it should be accessible to people whose first, or only, language is English.
It’s unnecessary: The pages linked to, all had English language titles.
It looks sycophantic.
Xyl 54 (talk) 16:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

References

I’ve added some references.
Bellamy's book is a good general work on the Eastern Front;
the Mann book is more detailed, but should be read critically, as it’s highly apologist in its tone.
Xyl 54 (talk) 16:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

This is truly why I'm ranting about non-Finnish sources about the Continuation War. Like you pointed out, in Bellamy's book there is an exact quote: "…The Finns deployed two armies: the South-Eastern, just north of Leningrad, and the Karelian Army, further north" (p182). The source for this information comes from Soviet sources, as also Platonov et.al., "Bitva za Leningrad" mentions this mysterious south-eastern army. But did Bellamy check his facts from Finland? Of course NOT!

If he had checked, he would have found that only army Finns had during the Continuation War was the Army of Karelia, and the forces which attacked to the Karelian Isthmus, II Corps (Laatikainen) and IV Corps (Oesch) operated directly under the Finnish main HQ (Mannerheim) located at Mikkeli. Sources, for example: National Defence College (Juutilainen at.al.): "Jatkosodan historia 2" (1987) (The "official" history of the war), Viljanen et.al.:"Suomen Sota 1941-1945 III"(1951), Rautala:"Karjalan Kannaksen takaisinvaltaus kesällä 1941"(2004).

So, is the only way to get British and American researchers to use Finnish sources to make them laughingstocks from the idiotic mistakes they make when omitting Finnish sources? Could somebody with an access to Bellamy politely ask him how Finns have managed to lose all information about that mysterious army, as there is no commands assigned to or from that army, no reports written, no personnel assigned to it's headquarters, no Corps or divisions or battalions assigned to that etc. etc. etc.

And once again: Finnish army and Finnish military historians have NO KNOWLEDGE OF SOUTH-EASTERN ARMY DURING THE CONTINUATION WAR. Finnish army Order Of Battle doesn't have had such an unit EVER. To all except complete idiot even the naming should have ring the warning bells: The only two occasions when Finns did have an army on field, it was named geographically: "Army of Karelia" at the Continuation War and "Army of the (Karelian) Isthmus" during the Winter War. And now comes the "South-Eastern Army", just like Finns could field so many armies that we lost ways to name them properly. DUH!

And then one should use these "English only" books as sources here in Wikipedia. Sheesh!! --Whiskey (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks; this looks like a touchy subject, so I’m not sure how to answer.

As far as this article is concerned, if the source given is incorrect, and we have an explanation, on the talk page or in a footnote or somewhere, then the information can go.

I’m keen that article content matches the source given, so that anyone following up the reference can find it, unless there is an explanation of why the source is wrong.

But that’s what we have here, so fine.

Xyl 54 (talk) 17:29, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

PS The detail isn’t essential anyway;

I was mainly wanting to put this operation into the wider context of the northern theatre, without diminishing the Finnish role, which is the way I felt it looked before.

Xyl 54 (talk) 17:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Globalization tag

From the edit summaries, the point of the globalization tag is that the editor wants to see more information about the Soviets in the article. If you can address this issue, please do. Also, whenever you place a tag like this, it's very helpful to other editors if you leave a note on a talk page to explain your concerns, in as much detail as you can. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits

This article was changed significantly without explanation; I’ve reverted it until an explanation is forthcoming. Xyl 54 (talk) 16:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Losses

Is there a source for them? This Russian/Soviet source gives 67265 irrecoverable, 68448 wounded for the Northern and Karelian Fronts, the 7th army, and Northern and Baltic Fleets from 29 Juny till 10 October 1941. Unless the scope of this article concerns a smaller period, the German and Finnish losses should be considerably higher as well. --Illythr (talk) 20:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I've re-arranged the figures in the infobox, to make them clearer; and yes, where are they from? I couldn't find a source for the force strengths or the casualties. Xyl 54 (talk) 11:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

CE

Tidied a few typos, added some isbns, loc map and coords. Nice article, look forward to more.Keith-264 (talk) 12:02, 25 October 2016 (UTC)