Talk:World War II casualties/Archives/2017/November

This is an archive of past discussions about World War II casualties. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Charts

There's a worse problem with section "Charts and graphs". Look, for example, at File:WwIIDeathsByCountry.png (right). No data of any-kind, no percentage points, no countries, no death statistics (numbers of dead are missing) and – most importantly – no reliable sources of data. Wikipedia is not a reliable source! This is a WP:POV nightmare. Poeticbent talk 17:33, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Poeticbent, I tagged this section,in any case I did not post these charts. As a rule of thumb I use only reliable sources for my edits and keep hard copies that can be supported by Email. Also when there are reliable sources that differ, I post both sources without my POV included. Poeticbent be my guest be and delete the charts.--Woogie10w (talk) 18:00, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Article move

The title of this article should be changed to World War II fatalities as the term casualty is defined to inlude the wounded. See Casualty (person). Nyth 63 15:29, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

The article is also confuses the difference by repeatedly using the term casuality to mean death or fatality. Nyth 63 15:38, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Nyth83, the wounded are included when the information is available, [1]. Not all nations provided figures for the wounded, that is why we do not see figures for total wounded. --Woogie10w (talk) 15:41, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

What about World War II death toll? The numbers that I assume would be of primary interest for readers are the fatalities, and wounded can be included as available. We could try an RM to get wider participation. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:16, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Wounded or wounds appears 52 times in this article. If the title is changed to fatalities or death toll I bet a clever Wikipedian will come along delete these references because they are not related to the topic.--Woogie10w (talk) 19:56, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

K.e.coffman you assume that the death toll is of primary interest to readers, actually some readers interested in military history would want to see the numbers of wounded. The reliable sources are not always in agreement regarding casualties. In any case the article presents the various reliable sources for casualties, not just the "correct" figure that was determined by a vote of Wikipedia editors.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:06, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

I searched for World war 2 death toll on Google and this article World War II casualties was at the top of the page. The other web pages listed are Mickey Mouse[2] presentations without sources.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:25, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia says: "Casualties is sometimes misunderstood to mean fatalities, but non-fatal injuries are also casualties." If the "non-fatal injuries are also casualties" I'm for "casualties". Poeticbent talk 20:38, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

It is rather misleading to state that wound/wounded appears in the article 52 times. While it is true that a text search for wound on the page gives that result, in reality, the word only appears TWICE in the text of the article. One of those in the lead. All other occurrences are either in the tables, footnotes or references. Searching for the word kill gives 176 results and death gives 327 results. It is clear that the scope of the article is just on the fatalities and that a few other casualty statistics are added in the tables almost as as afterthought. As a minimum, a clarification in the lead should be added to briefly explain the distinction and the word fatality should be used when that is what is meant. Even the only titled section of narrative in the article directly conflicts with the text that follows. Classification of casualties starts out with Compiling or estimating the numbers of deaths.... Nyth 63 21:57, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Now the article clearly includes wounded not just deaths. I have listed stats for military wounded on the table. Wounded is subject to a wide range of interpretation, some veterans of Battle of Khe Sanh came home with a box of Purple Hearts.--Woogie10w (talk) 22:16, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

M. Clodfelter has a chart with a listing of the wounded, I will post the figures.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:43, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on World War II casualties. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:49, 20 November 2017 (UTC)