Talk:Siege of Lille (1940)

HOI 3 Copy

Ok i only want ot say that i recognise this text from an event in the game Hearts of Iron 3 (HOI3). Actually this is a complete copy from the text in the game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinnemesis (talk • contribs) 23:15, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

@Dinnemesis: Very old thread, but specifically what parts are you saying were copied? All of it? I just did a few searches and didn't find duplicates, but I didn't check everything. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:38, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

CE

Tidied page added cites and rem banners.Keith-264 (talk) 18:27, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Restored page

Here is the place for a discussion of recent edits according to WP:BRD. Keith-264 (talk) 13:48, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Recent edits and reverts

@90.32.111.140: rv (yet again) un-cited edits. Your comment about the constituents of the French garrison looks plausible but you need to cite Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Keith-264 (talk) 14:27, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

3 RR

@72.80.62.127: I suggest you stop your disruptive editing and changing the goalposts each time you are proved wrong. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 21:21, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Narrative

@Albrecht: yes, apologies, I'm on day shifts. if you can add to the narrative that would be good as I've exhausted my sources. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 11:31, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Recent edits

@Maxibobus: please stop removing the British from the infobox. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:25, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

British flag

@Keith-264: It is clear from this page history, that several people disagree with you on whether the British army took part in this battle. While there is no doubt of the presence of trapped British soldiers and probably Belgian too, to my knowledge and I'm happy to be proved wrong, there were no British regiment or battalion fighting alongside the French army. Therefore, the British flag is misleading. If you know otherwise, please name regiments and commanding officers taking part. We will all have learned something new.

The matter is cited in the text. Stop vandalising the infobox and stop inventing criteria to suit yourself. Keith-264 (talk) 17:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

@Keith-264: Insulting me is not going to make false history true. The British Army did not take part in this battle and you know it. Everyone does. I'm trying to remove false information from this page, you keep adding unverified facts. I think we should open a discussion/dispute. I'm sure you will come up with good arguments for having the British Army as one of the main protagonists. Please stop adding misinformation calling "vandal" anyone disagreeing with you.

I suggested that you stop claiming insult where the is none and stop vandalising the infobox. I suggest that you look at the citations in the text for British involvement, followed by a good long look at Wikipedia:Edit warring, Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Citing sources. If you continue to remove cited facts you risk sanctions as well as a loss of credibility. PS you should end comments with ~~~~ Regards Keith-264 (talk) 16:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

@Keith-264: This is not cited facts we are talking about here. I have never disputed the fact that British soldiers may have been there. But the cited fact is a bit vague "some British soldiers surrendered". Were they deserters caught in the fight ? Did they belong to a fighting unit or working unit ? How many were they, 5 ? 50 ? You think this is enough to add Britain as a belligerent. I don't think so and I'm not the only one. You seem to think you own this page but you are not, this is a public encyclopedia and in this particular page there is a claim that several people find incorrect. Calling someone a vandal is an insult. You accuse me of vandalising that page, I'm not, I want historical accuracy. After the insult, I now get threatening language. You're not prepared to discuss, it's your way or the high way. Talk about credibility.

British soldier false claim and false citation

@Keith-264: I checked the sources. None of them mention British soldiers. p604 of A. Horne is the bibliography. The siege of Lille is mentioned page 538 and 539 but no mention of British soldiers (I borrowed the book on the Internet Archive for an hour and took screenshots). As for the Lloyd Clarke one, here is the exact quote:

"As it was, the remnants of five First Army divisions were trapped in the pocket and seven generals, 350 officers, 34,600 enlisted men, 300 guns and 100 armoured fighting vehicles were eventually captured when the French surrendered at midnight on 31 May-1 June." p323

No mention of British soldiers either. I've also got a screenshot, I can send them if you don't believe me. I think the mention of British soldiers should be removed from the text and the British flag should be removed. The citation is correct regarding the amount of French soldiers surrendering but I would change the A. Horne citation page to 539 instead of 604.

@Maxibobus: I've been going through my sources and now I can't find the citation. Unless I can, the British will have to stay gone so I withdraw my objections. Regards. PS don't forget to put ~~~~ after a comment. Keith-264 (talk) 08:44, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

PS p. 604 of Horne isn't in the biblio in my copy, (orig. year 1969) Penguin pbk. 1979 repr. 1982 ed. It's the chapter The End in the North: 24 May - 4 June pp. 597-620 Regards Keith-264 (talk) 09:39, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

@Keith-264: Fair enough. I suppose it's better to put the section it's in rather than the page as it depends on the edition or format.Maxibobus (talk) 17:15, 3 June 2021 (UTC)