Talk:Battle of Kock (1939)

Military history: European / German / Polish / World War II

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 articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	Polish military history task force
	World War II task force

Poland Mid‑importance

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Former talk

Bringing this page to something comprehensible is going to be a long drawn out process, if anybody knows anything about the subject and wants to take charge, please declare it. The original author has put so much hard work into this it would be a pity to abandon it, but it is possible some of the original is going to be lost in 'translation'. We need somebody who understands the Polish word order to do the tricky bits. in the meantime all help welcome. User:Conte Giacomo

Okay, I'll try to clean it up. [[User:Halibutt|Halibu tt]] 12:22, Aug 6, 2004 (UTC)

Good luck - I've been nibbling away at it for a wee while, but I don't really know the Polish military structure, geography or the battle well enough to do it justice. Berek 12:33, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

List of links

for personal use in cleaning up the article, I have no better place to post them. Please do not remove!

There is a way long section called Battle of Brześć and Kobryń. Shouldn't this be a separate piece or is there a reason why it is included here? It seems to me that if it could be moved to a new page this would be become much more manageable. --LeeHunter 00:02, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

First and foremost, I had no idea (at first glance) that this was part of World War 2. Or should I say "what is commonly called World War 2". One day I think I'll attempt some cleanup (and register here:) ), starting with some basic information tying this battle in with World War 2, without losing any of the intent of the original (Polish?) author. -- Anon 00:02, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Maw gawd this is a big cleanup job. Have fiddled with a bit of it. Can I make the following suggestins:

'group' replaced by Group when referring to a Polish formation, and Battlegroup when referring to a German one
'tank' replaced by Panzer when referring to Germans
Division names to be written in full on first reading - "3rd Panzer Division" - and then contracted to '3rd Panzer' subsequently where there is no risk of confusion with smaller units.
Apparently duplicated information to be duplicated whn it hinders comprehension rather than guessing what the original authoer meant.

The Land 17:57, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I had a hack at a piece of October 4th because it seemed easier than tackling the Battle of Brześć and Kobryń.

IMHO this absolutely must be another article as the title is the 'Battle of Kock' but a large section of the article talks about a 16 day engagement prior to the battle. I have some experience in writing about military campaigns, but I have no specific knowledge of this conflict other than general knowledge of how the German military hierarchy worked in this theatre at the start of WWII. I'll entertain any comments post-hatchet. :) CooCan 16:48, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

Gentlemen, I'm currently working on this article. I simply decided to start it all over by first preparing the article on Battle of Brześć, then moving part of the content of this article there and finally rewrite this thingie. I don't think we have to duplicate our efforts:) [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 17:33, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

Good luck with the re-write. I look forward to seeing your revisions. CooCan 18:08, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! Battle of Brześć article is now ready, please be so kind as to read it and correct the grammar. I'd really appreciate that. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 21:39, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

As noted on the Battle of Brzesc article, editing is complete...so on to the next task :) CooCan 20:55, Dec 4, 2004 (UTC)

I would like to ask about staying bibliography I add information of last events from 5 october and internet addres of part of site which is about this battle. In this site you can find some charst which show locations of polish and german units.

Broken links, infobox expansion

I have deleted two broken links and expanded "casualties" section in infobox. This important article needs solid rewrite. Good luck! 82.139.13.231 11:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article Problems

The opening paragraph says the battle lasted from September 1-27 but the info boc says it was from October 2-6. Which one is it? Red4tribe (talk) 18:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article was vandalized. This has been fixed. Thanks for the observation, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:51, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

B-class review

Failed due to insufficient citations. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 21:51, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Polish tactical victory?

Although Polish forces fought valiantly and inflicted great damage to Germans, in the end entire unit (17000 men) surrendered. How this can be called victory? If sources used in the article write about "Polish tactical victory", then why not, but it should be referenced. It looks really weird otherwise. Pavlor (talk) 14:51, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]