Talk:Battle of Leros

Image copyright problem with Image:RHS Vasilissa Olga.jpg

The image Image:RHS Vasilissa Olga.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Victory fanfare

Many, many years ago I read a book about the Battle of Leros and I remember it stating that this was the last time, after the victory, that the Nazi Germany victory fanfare was sounded on German radio. Has anybody ever heared about that one or even have a reliable source? EA210269 (talk) 12:19, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

NPOV

As now, this article looks like the only defenders of Leros were the British. This is not only false, because italian coastal and AA batteries pounded heavily german boats and stukas, but also counter-landing italians squads fighted Brandeburghers and Fallschirmjaegers, causing heavy losses. One of the reasons of german victory was the undecision of Brittorous at first and of Tilney afterwards, in ordering a counterattack while still detaining control of central part of the island and of key positions (batteries, airport and port). Many italians were shot after surrender by germans for the fierce resistence, and twelve officers were killed some days later. A great amount of ammunitions for the italian batteries, sent by Supermarina via Alexandria of Egypt was blocked there for unkonwn reasons and a mimimum part finally reached Leros on board of destroyers Velite and Artigliere. This description is totally inaccurate and if you want more informations please consult Aldo Levi, Avvenimenti in Egeo dopo l'armistizio (Rodi, Lero e isole minori), Roma, Ufficio storico della Marina Militare, 1993. (no ISBN); this book is written by an italian admiral and printed by the Historical Office of the Italian Navy. Also useful can be the corrisponding article on Italian wiki, it:Battaglia di Lero. Pigr8 ^{Melius esse quam videri} 11:47, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Great! Go ahead and add anything you like, provided it is well-sourced. --Constantine ✍ 12:24, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm undoubtedly bold, but also very busy with an article running for Fearured article, another 80+k in completiond, a WikiProject, it:Progetto:Marina needing constant care and many adds every day, on it.wiki. Great! If you think to fix the voice, I'll try to help you, elsewhere keep in mind that a skill user with 20+k contributions probably knows policies and pages like WP:SOFIXIT. It doesn't suffice having an article on Watchlist, you must also take care of it. Bye. --Pigr8 ^{Melius esse quam videri} 12:33, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Again, I don't disagree with the essence of your comments. But I also think a veteran editor knows that simply pointing out an article's deficiencies at the talk page will, by itself, get nothing done. The bias you pointed out is true but also understandable, as the article is based on easily available English-language sources, and not Italian ones, to which most people around here (including me, sadly) have no access. So if you have access to some good sources, and are interested in and know a thing or two about the period, the best thing to do is to put this article on your schedule for a rewrite. Constantine ✍ 17:03, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok, this is a very different answer respsct to the previous. But the problem is that time is limited for all of us. I'm glad I haven't found another possessive user like some others that take every change on some articles as a personal challenge, as I did a pair of days ago, and so I'll try to work on it as I can, and also to vector some other forces here ;) But, anyway, I could not leave the article as it was, time or not time, and if I was on it.wiki I has done exactly the same. Incidentally, I'l be glad to cooperate on any article with you and to exchange documentation where possible. Just as example, I suggest this site if you can translate from italian. Bye. --Pigr8 ^{Melius esse quam videri} 12:52, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

What about now?--Olonia (talk) 11:38, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Casualties

The British and Italian casualties listed in the Infobox are quite different from those mentioned in the "Casualties" section. What are the correct figures?--188.152.96.79 (talk) 19:36, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Indeed. Besides, for Italian casualties, there is something strange: Italian forces are listed as 8,320, with casualties being 254 killed or missing and 5,350 prisoners. That is, 5,600 overall. Where did the other 2,700 go?--Olonia (talk) 12:05, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Providing a Coherent Picture of the Land Battle

I have inserted lines and paragraphs in order to provide a coherent picture of the land battle. The article was almost unintelligible, and provided almost no useful descriptive geographic references of where the fighting took place.

The article seemed to be overly made up of descriptions of battle fought by the Italian coastal batteries; not only in driving off some German invasion attempts, but the minor ground battles fought at Italian batteries themselves.

The Italian coastal batteries were very important. On the other hand, the Italian infantry forces were put in coastal defense positions by the British commander and told to stay there and not move. Italian infantry had little part in the land battle.

I have a couple of very good military type maps of the island I could insert, but I am not sure about the copyright issues, or even how to insert them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SageMan (talk • contribs) 20:53, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Athough I have sympathy for your edits most or all of them were effectively unsourced. Please add sources. The Banner talk 20:59, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I am a source. The whole Leros affair was a waste that got many people killed for nothing. There is a lesson to be learned from the campaign. This was Churchill's third little disaster in the area: Gallipoli in WWI, the Greece and Crete intervention in 1941, and Leros in 1943.

It was obvious the British occupation of the islands east of Greece would fail once the Americans made it quite clear the focus was on Italy and the coming invasion of France. The nearest air bases in Cyprus were outside the range of most British fighters to begin with, much less those fighters having enough fuel for the loiter time necessary to gain air superiority. Given the British track record in these matters it looked like an ill-conceived scheme for the British to gain bases giving them more control over the Turkish Straits, as much as anything else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SageMan (talk • contribs) 00:10, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Please, do not get angry at me but read WP:RS. What we need are reliable, independent, prior published sources. Unpublished work can not be used, as it is considered own research. The Banner talk 22:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Ow, and please keep your edits neutral in style and tone. Off course, being critical is allowed but you have to source that (by the way: sources in English are NOT mandatory, just preferred). The Banner talk 22:19, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Banner, it appears you deleted an entire section I had written, which gave a coherent listing of the order of battle of both sides in the battle, and where the Germans landed on the island. Next I was going to show where the British battalions were located at the start of the battle. Then I was going to provide a comprehensible description of the battle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SageMan (talk • contribs) 21:48, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

The article has serious deficiencies as it is written. You have to pick your way through it and solve a crossword puzzle to make any sense of it. Whoever wrote it didn't even seem to have a grasp of when to insert a paragraph, or how to keep events in sequence. They mix up the north and south of the island. I can vastly improve the article using expert knowledge of warfare and good sources. If you don't think the official After Action Report written by the commander of the German invasion force, or the official British history of the campaign are good sources, then you evidently don't know what a "source" is. I am an expert is warfare and foreign policy. You, Banner, seem to be an expert in eating and restaurants. Please stick to what you know. Hmmm, perhaps I will start inserting a multitude of my thoughts about eating and Dutch restaurants, of which I know little and have no interest.

And you, Sir, have a blatant lack of manners.

Please read again what I have written about Reliable Sources: Please, do not get angry at me but read WP:RS. What we need are reliable, independent, prior published sources. Unpublished work can not be used, as it is considered own research. In fact, what an encyclopaedia needs is that you tell the world where you got your information. You mentioned a few, but failed to give those sources in your writings. Just use <ref>your sources as detailed as possible, preferably with URL or page numbers</ref>The Banner talk 22:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC

A lack of manners is deleting things of which you have no knowledge. Stick to eating and restaurants Banner. I have no desire to read what you have written, since I consider whatever you write to be trivial and irrelevant. Stick to what you know.

Yep, and I know the rules of Wikipedia. And I know manners. Goodbye, Sir. The Banner talk 08:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Yep, you are a pathetic little petty bureaucrat type of person Banner, like a child who thinks they have some power. Typical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SageMan (talk • contribs) 22:43, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

German Air Superiority

The infobox is slightly bare, and makes no mention of German Air superiority; it being such an important part of the battle after Kos, it perhaps should be mentioned for the benefit of those visiting the article casually. With the heavy German air power mentioned in the body of the article, could someone add the German air forces to the infobox who knows what they are? Alooulla (talk) 22:22, 17 June 2023 (UTC)