Talk:Battle of Łódź (1914)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of Łódź (1914) 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

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 15, 2005.

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pritzker Military Library Mid‑importance

	This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Military history: European / German / Russian & Soviet / World War I

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 not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not 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
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	World War I task force

Untitled[edit]

Some of the material from previous versions is valid and could be incorporated into the new article. Or it might be easier to start again, I'm not yet really sure. Andrewa 16:30, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Which parts are valid? Not the Khrushchev joke, or the "Panzers had yet to be invented in 1914" bit... Robert Southworth 17:49, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hmmmm, true. This comment was based on the edit history that didn't seem to be all jokesters.

What I should have said is, I haven't checked the article in detail to see whether any of the removed text is valid. Have you? If so, please tell us your findings, or better still, copy any that is valid into the article. Andrewa 22:51, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

True, the editors weren't all jokesters, but I think they were had. The basic text all came from the original anon source, so I wouldn't trust any of it. Unfortunately, I don't know much about the battle myself; I was just pretty sure that it hadn't involved time travel. :) Robert Southworth 01:18, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Appalling winter conditions?[edit]

...at times the temperature dropped as low as -10 degress. Minus ten what? Celsiusor Fahrenheit? Celsius makes more sence (since this battle took place in Europe), but -10C don't sound terrible appaling to me... WegianWarrior 05:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That part has been taken out, but I'd suspect it meant Fahrenheit. Ten below zero in Celsius is just 14F, which is cold but not exactly "appalling," and not even all that unusual for the Łódź area in winter. Ten below in Fahrenheit (-23.3C) qualifies for "appalling." 74.245.91.25 21:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Order of Battle[edit]

@Asayoelson: I removed a large section of text on the OOB because 6 Weltkrieg 459 ff does not appear to be a reliable source. On first blush, I think that information might be correct but we don't accept self-published works. Chris Troutman (talk) 06:36, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Asayoelson: While I appreciate you engaging me on this topic, this discussion belongs here on the article talk page, not my user talk. We cannot assume the website is reliable because you say so. It doesn't make sense to add information to Wikipedia if it is unreferenced or not referenced with reliable sources. Many of the articles about WWI suffer from this problem. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:37, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]