Battle of Stalingrad was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
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
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hungary, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hungary 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.HungaryWikipedia:WikiProject HungaryTemplate:WikiProject HungaryHungary
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Romania-related topics 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.RomaniaWikipedia:WikiProject RomaniaTemplate:WikiProject RomaniaRomania
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
the article cites Sokolov data about 2 million KIA and MIA casualties which seems absolutely unrealistic. Soviet forces in Battle of Stalingrad were ~1,1 million soldiers (every soldier died twice?) and Soviet army in total were ~5,5 million people
The issue is that both German and soviet losses are not just Stalingrad, they are for all fighting on the Southern Front from July, which is way more than “Stalingrad”. 47.220.25.18 (talk) 16:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The soviet forces 1,1 mils also are not for the city itself, it is for Southern Front. Total Soviet forces were 5,5 mils for all fronts. Loosing 2 mils KIA would mean 4-8 mils wounded resulting in destruction of the whole Soviet army which is absurd
At least read Sokolov page in Russian wiki with translator: he is a freak of Russian history science community, his "researches" are not based on any facts. It is ridiculous that they are used as a serious data here
nothing of the sort. Russians have terrible medicine with incompetent doctors. For every one killed, 1, maximum 2 wounded among Russians. Most of the Soviet wounded died.--Vaclaw1990 (talk) 10:43, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The 4th Panzer Army, ordered south on 13 July to block the Soviet retreat "weakened by the 17th Army and the 1st Panzer Army", had turned northwards to help take the city from the south.
Where it says 'weakened by the 17th Army and the 1st Panzer Army," is that meant to be 'weakened by the transfer/loss' of those units? As written, it sounds like the German formations fought a battle with themselves. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 23:33, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any issue with the Pereslegin source. The Suvorov source is up for debate. The 1,500,000 total casualties for the Axis is up in the air as well, with the source by Krinko and Medvedev as inflated, with total casualties of the Axis reaching no more than 880,000.Reaper1945 (talk) 04:02, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Forgetting 1.5M, the numbers still dont match. I summed to get upper limit 873K while the infobox says total dead 500K + total captured 235K, which would be 735K. Krinko&Medvedev say "over 880K" --Altenmann>talk04:50, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This results due to multiple sources being used which may have different casualties and the sort, especially the 500,000 dead. The 1.5 million I know is doubted by Krinko & Medvedev, and Axis casualties certainly didn't exceed the total of the Soviet Union. Capping it at 880,000 is recommended by Krinko & Medvedev. Also the issues is to how the scope of the battle is defined, as it goes from the city itself to the larger campaign around the general region. Reaper1945 (talk) 04:58, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
We could include that citation for the upper bound rather than the 1,500,000 which is cited as inflated by Krinko & Medvedev. Seems to be more reasonable. If someone could just skim the book and confirm it that would be nice as a possible alternative for the upper bound of Axis casualties. Reaper1945 (talk) 05:46, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sic is not Sic (typo in quoted section in Aftermath)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
I checked the cited source in the quoted section from Alexander Werth [309] under the Aftermath subheading of the article, to see if it was written as is in the text.
The quote in the Wikipedia article is not cited directly from the text, with the second "more" in the quote "Then we came into the yard. Here lay more more horses' skeletons, and to the right, there was an enormous horrible cesspool – fortunately, frozen solid." not present in the original text. A comma is also misplaced.
"Then we came into the yard. Here lay more more horses' skeletons, and to the right, there was an enormous horrible cesspool – fortunately, frozen solid." should be changed to
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Right below the infobox of the page there is this line: "As the invasive of the Soviet Union progressed, Germany's fuel supplies dwindled and that drove it to focus on moving deeper into Soviet territory to take the country's oil fields." Change invasive to invasion as I believe it fits the context better and is a simple grammar error. Thanks :) ~2026-30700-52 (talk) 10:09, 22 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg)
.svg){kind=small}
Not done. Casualty data is never perfect. It's always an estimation, and as stated above, it's not just Stalingrad. NotJamestack (talk) 15:15, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Done Streetr4 (talk) 11:31, 22 May 2026 (UTC)