Talk:German casualties in World War II

Losses on the Eastern front/Western front vs. Losses in Germany 1945

As far as I know, Overmans does not list losses during the battles in Germany 1945 as separated on the two fronts, but simply as losses in Germany during 1945. These losses of 1,230,045 men, could however, according to Overmans be attributed at the rate of a certain percent to the Western front (I am not sure, but I think it is 40 %), but as it looks in the article, these losses are fully attributed to the Eastern front, since the losses on the Western front until the 31/12 1944 has not been adjusted with these losses (Overmans put the losses on the Western front until the 31/12 1944 as 339,000, and as you can see, this is the same number as the one quoted for the Western front during the whole war). Maybe the same mistake is done in the article about the Eastern front, I have not checked, but someone with access to Overmans writings needs to take a close look at these numbers. /Best regards. EriFr (talk) 11:32, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

German Civilian Casualties too low

The numbers listed on the German civilian casualties are almost certainly too low. And the numbers for the Allied bombing are too high. The German government has estimated that about 250,000 civilian dies during the western Allied bombing offensive. The US Strategic bombing survey estimated 305,000 civilian deaths due to the Western allies bombing.

As for total civilian deaths, the "History of the Second World War" published by Marshall Cavendish estimated upwards of 3.9 Million German civilain deaths - most of the during the winter of 44/45 when the Soviets pushed into East Prussia and the other eastern German territories. And this does not even count the approximately 2 Million German deats from 45-47 for the expulsion of Germans from the eastern territiries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mekozak (talk • contribs) 16:15, 27 February 2010 (UTC) (Mekozak (talk) 16:23, 27 February 2010 (UTC))

Problem is, there are no reliable figures for civilian casualties especially for 1944/5 in the East. The two million figure for deaths related to the expulsion results from a survey in the 1950s when the number of inhabitants was related to refugees/expellees in what was then West and East Germany, the difference was claimed as casualties. This figure has been disputed in recent years as more data became available. So was the figure of some 300,000 deaths during the Odsun (expulsion) from Czechoslovakia revised to some 30,000 by the joint German-Czech historians commission.

The number of German civilian casualties for World War II is usually given with 650 - 850,000 dead, mainly from bombing (310 - 535,000). The Nazis killed between 190,000 and 300,000 Germans. Only about 20-50,000 were killed in fighting. There is more in Overmans books and articles. Unfortunately they are all in German as far as I am aware. --Dodo19 (talk) 16:51, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

3 million expellees were killed or died during their forced flight and expulsion after 1945. This is the historically correct number.--92.230.232.28 (talk) 17:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

This is not so, German government figures put the number at 2 million including those taht died in Germany in the Soviet Zone after being expelled. The figure of 3 million is Neo-Nazi propaganda--Woogie10w (talk) 13:59, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Neo Nazi ?...o.k., but notice that also this quasi official publication of Volksbund Deutsche Kriegsgräberfürsorge (2005, reprint 2010): [1] Willi Kammerer; Anja Kammerer- Narben bleiben die Arbeit der Suchdienste - 60 Jahre nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg Berlin Dienststelle 2005. (Published by the Search Service of the German Red Cross. The foreword to the book was written by German President Horst Köhler and the German interior minister Otto Schily) soft, modest and pious as it my sound, transports the message, that - allegedly - some 2,25 million (!) Germans perished during Flucht und Vertreibung; see page 12 there (which is whitout any doubt no meticulously counted sum of individual cases, but the result of a crude population balance: before/after, in other words, more or less, official West German propaganda line from the 1950s on) --129.187.244.19 (talk) 14:31, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Overmans' Method

Here [[2]] I have made some general remarks on Overmans' statistical methods some months ago. In fact, he reaches his figures not by going into an archive and using official documents, but by spot-checking a few thousand card files as a sample for the fate of single German soldiers. Then he makes extrapolations to get an overall picture for about 18.000.000 soldiers. The most dubious matter are, however, his tables which give very exact figures up to the last digit. Of course everyone will get to tables first, especially readers who do not speak German and are not willing to work through the whole book. And in an appendix tables are easily accessible all the more. For example, he states that exactly 2.742.909 died on the Eastern Front until 31/12/1944. But this seemingly exact figure has been reached by an extrapolation and will never be found in any OKW document or archive. But by giving exact figures in tables Overmans is able to give the impression that he is right. On the other hand he states that the registration system used by the Wehrmacht to count the casualties was simply inaccurate. For criticism on Overmans' method see here [[3]]. We should give other sources for this article as well (the page ww2stats.com could serve as a starting point, there are original documents from OKW and so on) and try to "liberalize" the matter by expanding the text.--Akribes (talk) 19:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

These original documents from OKW cannot be used on Wikipedia as a source, to cherrypick figures from them would be original research. We need a reliable secondary source that explains why the OKW figures are vaild and Overmnans is wrong. Not just your POV.--Woogie10w (talk) 10:44, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

I look at the world from the POV of an accountant and always check the numbers. The German stats on that website http://ww2stats.com/index.html are informative. Look at the schedule prepared by the West German government for the Population Balance for Germany in 1937 Borders Wehrmacht losses are 3.760 million; go to the schedule for Expulsions for area outside German borders Wehrmacht dead are 432,000; Austria was another 280,000 and there were 60,000 Wehrmacht dead from Western Europe. These figures of the 1950's adding up to 4,530,000 do not include 232,000 dead in the Volkssturm and other paramilitary units.

The often quoted OKW figures in military histories give total killed of 2,230,300 up to 4/30/45, the Maschke Commission reported POW dead of 1,214,000. These two figures add up to 3,444,300.

Rudiger Overmans found losses were actually 5,318,000, the Overmans research project had German government support. Overmans found that the 1950's estimate of German military losses among ethnic Germans in Eastern Europe was understated in the amount of 344,000. He also included 190,000 dead in the Volkssturm and other paramilitary units outside of Eastern Europe. When you include the 344,000 undercouned military dead in Eastern Europe and the Volkssturm ect. of 190,000 with the demographic estimate of 4,530,000 we come up to 5,094,000. This is a good cross check that verifies the validity of the Overmans figures and his conclusion that the OKW figures are not reliable--Woogie10w (talk) 10:38, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Corrections of the Figures to agree with Overmans

Today I corrected the figures per Overmans. I own the book and have verified the figures. The figures that were there before are not in Deutsche militärische Verluste im Zweiten Weltkrieg.--Woogie10w (talk) 13:56, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Here is page 336 of Deutsche militärische Verluste im Zweiten Weltkrieg on Google books, this backs up my corrections [4] --Woogie10w (talk) 17:33, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Rudiger Overmans Resume

Here is the resume of Rüdiger Overmans in German. For those who do read German, do a Google translation. His credentials are impeccable. [5] --Woogie10w (talk) 15:28, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Who he?

The previous entry above mentions "the resume of Rüdiger Overmans in German". The line of text in the article: "Overmans believes that there is not sufficient data..." appears just after the first table.
The initial statement assumes that the reader understands German, the second part assumes that the reader knows who 'Overmans' is or was. As far as this reader is concerned, neither is the case.
It was not until I got to note 5 that I found out that he is/was a doctor.
A doctor of what?

If he was introduced in an article lede (as per the MoS), things would be a lot more clear. Something like "The author/historian Dr Rüdiger Overmans, in his research..."
I would write one myself, but I don't know the gentleman from Adam!

RASAM (talk) 21:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

SHAEF Weekly Intelligence Summaries

For detailed figures of the German Prisoners of War held by the Western Allies, a lot of information is available in the SHAEF (Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force) Weekly Intelligence Summaries, held at the Eisenhower Library. These figures give the monthly totals of PoWs on the Western Front from DDay through to April 26th 1945. I suggest these figures could supplement Rudiger Overmans table of German PoW's held by Western Allies in the section German Prisoners of War. Jtbrown43 (talk) 15:16, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Were these figures published in a reliable source that can be verified? If so please provide a citation. --Woogie10w (talk) 15:35, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. These Weekly Intelligence Summaries are available from the Eisenhower Library http://www.eisenhower.archives.gov/. Copies can be obtained for the cost of postage and photocopying. These are primary sources and are freely available. They hold an enormous amount of very factual information, which was compiled within a few days of the events happening. It is noticable how many figures of German PoWs captured are given. Jtbrown43 (talk) 16:03, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

These are primary sources that cannot be used on Wikipedia. We need to find a reliable published source that cite these figures. --Woogie10w (talk) 16:35, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. I have many published sources. Here is just one. Eisenhower's 'Crusade in Europe' published 1948 by Heinemann page 452, 'During the first three weeks of April the western Allies captured more than a million prisoners.' Footnote 18.

Footnote 18 states 'SHAEF G-2 Summary, Diary, Office C-in-C, Book XV, under date April 22, 1945'. Jtbrown43 (talk) 10:25, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

See German casualties in World War II#United States Army Figures for German and Italian Losses the official US figures for captured enemy forces are already listed. Source is Biennial report of the Chief of Staff of the United States Army to the Secretary of War : July 1, 1943, to June 30, 1945.--Woogie10w (talk) 11:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for replying and pointing towards General George Marshall's Biennal Report, Center of Military History,1996 which looked with some interest.There alternative figures for the number of Germans and Italians who surrendered in Tunisia. Eisenhower in his book 'Crusade in Europe' on page 172 gives to be 240,000, of whom approximately 125,000 were German. Montgomery in his 'Memoirs' published 1958 gives the figure of 248,000 men on page 153. Ellis in his 'World War 2 Databook' 1993 gives the figure 266,000 Germans and Italians pows in Tunisia only. Hastings in 'All hell let loose' gives the figure of 238,000 prisoners taken on May 13th,1943 on page 379. The Daily Telegraph on May 12th,1943 states, 'The African campaign is over ... of the prisoners 110,000 are German.' Is it possible that General Marshall when he states in his table of German and Italian losses that 130,000 Germans and Italians were captured in Tunisia, he actually means 130,000 Germans were captured in Tunisia, which is in much closer agreement with other accounts.Jtbrown43 (talk) 11:12, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

IMO the alternative figures for the number of Germans and Italians who surrendered in Tunisia belong here: German casualties in World War II#A compilation of published statistics for German casualties. Your research drives home the point that statistics for German World War II military casualties are divergent and contradictory. It is not our job as editors of Wikipedia to comment on the veracity of George Marshall's Biennial Report, we can only post what our sources tell us. --Woogie10w (talk) 11:52, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

A possible explanation for the discrepancy is that following the Italian surrender in 1943, 100,000 Italians volunteered to work as 'co-operators'. They were given considerable freedom and mixed with local people. [6] (click on read more) --Woogie10w (talk) 13:57, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

The Picture

Is it just me, or does it look like he was shot through the helmet from behind with a high velocity bullet? If so quite a suspicious KIA designation, no? 86.131.45.27 (talk) 07:20, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Possibly one of those fourteen year olds ordered by Hitler in the last month to defend Berlin to the death, who was executed trying to escape.Profhum (talk) 13:47, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Really, this page should be for serious discussion of the topic, not a chat room.--Woogie10w (talk) 01:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Allied Strategic Bombardment and in 1945 Air Raids on the Eastern Front

What did happen to this data [7] - please do not remove it from the article: "The West German government in October 1956 estimated 635,000 civilian deaths during the air war in Germany and the annexed territories, 500,000 killed by strategic bombing and 135,000 from air raids in the 1945 flight and evacuations on the eastern front. They also estimated an additional 20,000 civilians, not included here, who were killed during the land campaign in Germany but are included in the schedule below for Total Population Losses 1939-1946. Civilian deaths in the 1945 air raids on eastern Front after 1/31/1945 are also included with the figures for the losses during the Flight and expulsion of Germans (1944–50) → Die deutschen Vertreibungsverluste. Bevölkerungsbilanzen für die deutschen Vertreibungsgebiete 1939/50.Herausgeber: Statistisches Bundesamt - Wiesbaden. - Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer, 1958 p. 14" --IIIraute (talk) 20:13, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

The numbers are still there--Woogie10w (talk) 20:24, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Lead: "According to official statistics published by the West German government in 1956 436,000 civilians were killed by allied strategic bombing within the Third Reich borders of 1942" - why only mention civilian casualties from "within the Third Reich borders of 1942"? What is about the 134,000 civilian casualties from the "1945 Air Raids on Eastern Front"?

The lead should state: "According to official statistics published by the West German government in 1956 436,000 civilians were killed by allied strategic bombing within the Third Reich borders of 1942, and another 134,000 civilians in the 1945 Air Raids on Eastern Front. --IIIraute (talk) 22:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

That would be an unnecessary duplication because civilian deaths in the 1945 air raids on eastern Front after 1/31/1945 are also included below with the figures for the losses during the Flight and expulsion of Germans (1944–50). In any case the description air raids on eastern Front includes all civilian deaths due to military activity artillary shelling ect. on the east front in 1945. The Statistisches Bundesamt figures from 1958 are a population balance that includes all civilian losses including bombing ect. --Woogie10w (talk) 22:17, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I see - thank you. But what about the sentence: "They also estimated an additional 20,000 civilians, not included here, who were killed during the land campaign in Germany but are included in the schedule below for Total Population Losses 1939-1946." I know the figure is included in the schedule for Total Population Losses, however shouldn't that figure also be mentioned in the "Civilian Casualties" section?

Also the "22,000 citizens died during the Battle of Berlin" figure is missing in the "Civilian Casualties" section? --IIIraute (talk) 00:38, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Should there also be a section for the civilian casualties of the political courts. The Sondergerichte sentenced some 12,000 members of the German resistance to death, and civil courts sentenced an additional 40,000 Germans to death. --IIIraute (talk) 01:32, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Be bold add it, I suspect it is included in the 300,000--Woogie10w (talk) 01:52, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I was wondering if they are included in the "Deaths due to Nazi political, racial and religious persecution" figure? I will leave it for now, but I will try to find more details about it. --IIIraute (talk) 02:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Overy figures in the lead

What's that all about? → [8] --IIIraute (talk) 20:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Overy is a well known and respected historian. His recent analysis needs to be brought to the attention of readers. The official figures of 1956 are by no means the final word on the topic.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I know - now that I see the current version - however at the point of that edit the Overy figures had become the only source. --IIIraute (talk) 20:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Alles klar, I fixed that problem--Woogie10w (talk) 20:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I intend to take a peek at the Overy book when I go to Barnes and Noble. We need to know how Overy arrived at the 353,000. Stay tuned.--Woogie10w (talk) 01:23, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I have borrowed the Overy book from the local library and intend to include his analysis in the article. An important point that must be made is that the 353,000 air raid dead is based Overy's calculations.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:03, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

A minor point that must be made is that Overy is clearly in error when he cites the official figures for German total air raid dead at 625,000, that correct total is 635,000. The doubting Thomas's can check the official German figures here on page 142 Erich Hampe "Der Zivile Luftschutz im Zweiten Weltkrieg" pp.138-142 --Woogie10w (talk) 20:42, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your updates to the article. --IIIraute (talk) 17:29, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Civilian air raid deaths

So according to Overy, circa 350,000 Germans were killed by strategic bombing campaigns 1940-1945? In order to contrast that better with the 90,000 casualties due to the bombing of Britain within the same timeframe and the 26,000 civilian casualties due to the 4-week bombing of Warsaw in 1939, it could be noteworthy to include Overy's precise figures (if he gives them) minus Austrians and ethnic Germans outside of Germany's 1937 borders, German military and police personnel, forced laborers and POWs in Germany.

After all, the Nazi regime had sort of made it an official policy to purposefully not shelter POWs and forced laborers from air raids in order to include them in propaganda figures of air raid deaths, and Austria as well as ethnic Germans were part of the regime's aggressive and völkisch propaganda expansion campaigns, whereas neither the UK nor Poland had either during WWII.

One reason to re-examine the figures that way is that currently there's a growing New Right movement in Germany (think (anti-Muslim) Pegida/(anti-American) Pegada, Reichsbürgerbewegung, Alternative for Germany, Hogesa, identitarian movement, and last but not least National Democratic Party of Germany who have propagated this for decades) demanding to classify the WWII strategic bombings by the RAF as well as the US Air Force (and also similarly absurdly bloated casualty figures ranging up to tens of millions for those Rheinwiesenlager POW camps that were run by the US Army) as a war crime and a crime against humanity on par with the Holocaust. --2003:56:6D1B:C673:512F:21E5:254A:ABEE (talk) 11:10, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source that supports your comments, on Wikipedia we cannot post our personal POV--Woogie10w (talk) 11:18, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Uhhh...I need a reliable source for a suggestion to include more precise categories from Overy's book in the article, in case he gives them? It's my understanding that Overy is a reliable source. --2003:56:6D1B:C673:512F:21E5:254A:ABEE (talk) 12:17, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Overy's book does not support your comments. The bottom line here is that Wikipedia is not a soapbox to push our own POV--Woogie10w (talk) 12:23, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Support what? All I did was ask if Overy does include categories for air-raid casualties such as a.) German civilians within the German borders of 1937, b.) German military and police personnel, c.) Austrian and ethnic German casualties, d.) POWs and forced laborers in Germany, and suggested that if he does have them, they should be included in the article. These are categories already recognized as valid by the entire article we have so far (our articles on the Battle of Britain and The Blitz do the same for similar categories with UK casualties), only Overy's figures are not listed with these categories. --2003:56:6D1B:C673:512F:21E5:254A:ABEE (talk) 12:39, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Overy does not breakout German civilians within the German borders of 1937, b.) German military and police personnel, c.) Austrian and ethnic German civilians, d.) POWs and forced laborers in Germany. But He does include in a separate section the deaths of civilians killed by Allied bombing in France, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands. My suggestion is that you get the Overy book rather than speculate on its content--Woogie10w (talk) 12:49, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Okay, the sentence on his lack of precisely this categorical treatment we have so far, and perhaps also the one on his inclusion of casualties of Allied bombings elsewhere, was all that was really needed as a precise reply to my suggestion. Anything beyond that was just excessive and, I'm sorry to add, most likely a rather emotional and uncalled-for violation of WP:AGF that has cost us several rounds of going back and forth before the precise answer was given at last. --2003:56:6D1B:C673:512F:21E5:254A:ABEE (talk) 13:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

The neo Nazi propaganda in Germany [9] is unknown in the English speaking world. Let's leave sleeping dogs lay and keep it off Wikipedia. As a young American guest in German homes 45 years ago the older people would bring up this topic, I kept my mouth shut. This is nothing new.--Woogie10w (talk) 13:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Okay, that's another civil, reasonable, and fair reply to my original suggestion. And though I accept that reasoning as a more relevant reply (while at the same time I don't necessarily agree with you that issues such as these would be as trivial as that they could be glossed over just because they're happening next door rather than in your own home, and obviously there's enough relevance to them to warrant as many English-language articles as I've linked above), I nonetheless would've appreciated if you'd've replied in such a civil tone right away, rather than making accusations against a fellow user simply for suggesting to bring Overy's figures in line with those categories we already have all over the article. --2003:56:6D1B:C673:512F:21E5:254A:ABEE (talk) 15:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Overmans WWII Casualties

Hello, I was wondering what you think of the work done by Rudiger Overmans regarding German WWII casualties. I have been trying to research casualties specifically against the Western Allies, and well as early in the war. I saw for example Overmans list total dead for the Italian Campaign as 150,660, but then Feldgrau.com states it was till November of 11/30/44 47,873. Why is there such a big difference in numbers? Thanks for your time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregcorssino (talk • contribs) 02:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Please read this article which outlines the study by Overmans who maintains that the statistics compiled during the war by the high commard are incomplete. The figure of 47,873 war dead in Italy are German high command statistics taken from Müller-Hillebrand Das Heer 1933–1945 Vol.3 Page 265 The statistics on the Feldgrau webpage are for the Feldheer(Army) only and cover up until November 30, 1944.--Woogie10w (talk) 11:31, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

There is a self published webpage Human Losses in World War II that has copied statistical data on WW2 casualties from German documents prepared during the war [10] This compiliation should be used with caution because the documents are primary source material that can only be used on Wikipedia to support material that is in a secondary source. An important caveat is that the figures they list do not add down in all cases, the authors of this webpage have not proof read the material they posted. --Woogie10w (talk) 16:45, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the response and information.Gregcorssino (talk) 19:42, 6 June 2015 (UTC)Gregcorssino

You are welcome, feel free to drop a line if you need additional information.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:45, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

In response to Woogie's question about my edit: I tried to briefly summarize with the edit, but let me expand upon that. I wanted to first paragraph to be broader, stating the "official" figure, but also pointing out that there are several other dissenting viewpoints (the previous version of that paragraph focused on Overy - his estimates are valuable and likely more accurate than the 1956 report, but he's not the only one discussed in the following paragraphs). I also moved Overy's analysis below that of the United States Strategic Bombing Survey, not because his was any less important or accurate, but for the sake of chronology (USSBS came shortly after WW2, Overy's came just a couple of years ago - It's true that the German estimate came a little later than USSBS's, but it should remain first in the listing because that is the "official" report against which the others are compared). As far as my deletion of the Bombing of Dresden paragraph, I did so because it is already discussed 2 paragraphs earlier, so it was redundant (the earlier paragraph does not include the now-accepted 25,000 death figure, so if you want to put that in there you can; however, I think it suffices to have it say that the death toll was inflated, and have the link to the main Dresden Bombing article for people to click on if they want more details). There were a few other minor edits (e.g. link to the Eastern Front article), but I don't think those are the ones you're asking me to explain. Hope that helps.DoctorEric (talk) 23:47, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

I suspect that you have not read Overy. He makes a point that the German figure is inflated because Dresden was overstated in the 1956 figures at 60,000. That is a major part of his reduction of the German figure. More recent research indicates that the figure is c.20-25,000. The point re. Dresden in the Overy section definitely belongs there. I will take this to RSN if necessary--Woogie10w (talk) 23:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Agree with inclusion of Dresden section. I think the current wording (expanding on first Dresden reference, and including parts from second before removing it) is satisfactory. The Dresden bombing was terrible (we can debate another time if it was a "war crime"), but the reported death toll was almost certainly inflated. Thanks for your help.DoctorEric (talk) 00:44, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Estimate in the lead

I'm currently reading Hartmann, Christian (2013). Operations Barbarossa: Nazi Germany's War in the East, 1941–1945. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-966078-0. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help) and the book states:

• "Since the end of the 1990s, we have known that the total German military losses were actually far higher that had long been believed: close to 5,318,000 men".

The book is short (only 160 pages, so Hartmann does not go into detail, but I believe the book is reflective of the current German historiography. Here's the German wiki article for the author: de:Christian Hartmann (Historiker) -

How does this square with this sentence in the lead?

• Post war German estimates of military deaths range from approximately 4.3 to 5.3 million armed forces personnel.

References

K.e.coffman (talk) 04:11, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree, the lead needs to reflect the fact that current estimates by German historians put total losses at 5.3 million, however we also need to point out the current official position of the German government is that losses were 4.3 million. The official German government figures for air raid and expulsion deaths are also currently disputed by historians. As editors we cannot pontificate and determine which are the correct figures based on the Hartmann statement and then tell readers that the German government figures are wrong. The lead should reflect the fact the official German government figures are disputed. --Woogie10w (talk) 05:59, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

The adjusted wording, stating which estimate comes from where, works well:

A recent study by the German historian Rüdiger Overmans found that the German High Command statistics are not reliable, he estimated German military dead at 5.3 million. However the German government still maintains that its records list 4.3 million dead and missing military personnel.

References

Thank you for implementing the change. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:47, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Hitler's Beneficiaries: Plunder, Racial War, and the Nazi Welfare State

Götz Aly quotes numbers of death penalties - both civilian and military. I don't know, if the numbers include Czech and Polish citizens in annexed lands.Xx236 (talk) 08:04, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Poles in the Wehrmacht

German sources quoted in this page assume that only (Volks)Germans were drafted. Poles in the Wehrmacht describes forced VolksGermanization.Xx236 (talk) 08:13, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Good point Xx236, I will add details--Woogie10w (talk) 13:34, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

The question of ethnic idenity and citizenship was tricky in post war Poland. I knew a person who was a Polish citizen in 1939 who spoke both German and Polish, he served in the Waffen SS. In 1950 he become a West German citizen. Yet his sister remained in Poland and was still a proud Polish citizen. They traveled to Hungary to get together. --Woogie10w (talk) 21:06, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

The question of ethnic idenity and citizenship was tricky in many places in Europe, see Alsace, Transylvania, Yugoslavia. Poles massacred each other during WWI as citizens of several states.Xx236 (talk) 07:27, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Grammar

There is a section headed “Total Missing and Presumed Dead (not including POW) per Overmans” describing the number of civilians presumed dead. Under there, in the table, is a column headed “Amount”. Despite current trends in social media, the English language does not refer to “amounts” of people. It refers to numbers of people. As I don’t want to damage the page because I don’t know what I’m doing, would somebody mind altering this to reflect standard English please? Flanker235 (talk) 22:30, 2 November 2018 (UTC)