This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of France article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
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 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium 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.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Luxembourg, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg 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.LuxembourgWikipedia:WikiProject LuxembourgTemplate:WikiProject LuxembourgLuxembourg articles
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy 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.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Czech Republic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Czech Republic 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.Czech RepublicWikipedia:WikiProject Czech RepublicTemplate:WikiProject Czech RepublicCzech Republic articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Slovakia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Slovakia 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.SlovakiaWikipedia:WikiProject SlovakiaTemplate:WikiProject SlovakiaSlovakia articles
Battle of France was a Warfare 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.
One factor was that they left the ardennes to go and hep defend belgium, a region with heavy treeline and bumpy hills because they thought that Hitler couldn't penetrate the area with so many troops and tanks however, Hitler did penetrate his forces through the area and blasted through the french lines which French Commanders were caught veyr off guard by. 72.138.179.198 (talk) 17:55, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In the prelude section under 'Allies' it states that at the start of battle the BEF was 1.6 million men. Given the BEF was only 13 divisions that is clearly wrong. Firestar47 (talk) 10:47, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that seeing as 250,000 were taken home from Dunkirk and another 150,000+ emigre contingents from other ports it might be that the 1 in 1.6 million is wrong. Keith-264 (talk) 11:02, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe. Annoyingly all the books on my shelf give only the number of divisions. The number though is written in full so is unlikely a typing error. Firestar47 (talk) 11:00, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The number of 1.6 million men refers not to the BEF but to the total armed forces, territorial divisions and units in training included.--MWAK (talk) 14:11, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I think the author has added a zero to the figure. 160,000 would tally with 13 divisions, and with the numbers rescued in Operation Dynamo. Davelovatt (talk) 17:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It says that the french mobilised 5 million men but that only half served in units in the north. So where were the other half? Are we talking about the navy as well? I feel this needs clarification. Firestar47 (talk) 10:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the text now states "France mobilised about one-third of the male population between the ages of 20 and 45, bringing the strength of its armed forces to 5,000,000" but this is a clear mistake. The male population of France numbered about twenty million in 1940 and about six million of these were between 20 and 45 years old.--MWAK (talk) 14:30, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(originally from Loic on AHF) "Pierre Le Goyet La défaite 10 mai-25 juin 1940 gives for Metropolitan France 1. may 1940
2 651 802 "aux Armées" (means the Front)
529 028 des formations du territoire (Interior)
675 386 Depôts et Centres d'Organisation (Interior)
75 638 Foreigners (RMVE & Légion in Métropolitan France, Polish & Czechoslovak Armies)
53 466 in the hospitals"
Overseas and Air forces aren't included in the above nor is naval. For the Belgians and Dutch, the wiki articles show 600,000-650,000 men and 280,000 men respectively. The BEF in France was 390,000 men. Luxembourg had 693. Even if we only go with the Front armies for the French and even then exclude the 150,000 French attributed to the Alps (and no airforces), go with the lower Belgian estimate, and ignore the RAF that totals to at least 3,770,000. Something is seriously wrong with the article. 47.220.25.18 (talk) 06:12, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Somehow I noticed and lowercased "Weygand plan" before noticing the other named plans. Looking at n-gram stats, it seems that these were initially much more often lowercase, but the capitalization has been creeping up over years. Still, not close to the "consistently capitalized in sources" criterion in the MOS:CAPS guideline about what to treat as a proper name. The Escaut plan shows up much less in sources, but also sometimes lowercase, as here (one of several books quoting this 1941 passage, or maybe something older). On the other hand, the names "Plan D", etc., seem more often treated as proper names. So shall we fix them accordingly? Dicklyon (talk) 21:50, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MWAK, (I am repeating my response to someone else here): I thoroughly read the two books on the matter mentioned, and was left with this clear impression that the decision to stop so much military spending was the action of the new--and first ever--Socialist party government, who prioritized its people's every day lives over military spending. The strategic angle on stopping the Maginot line worked as well, and I believe that it became the dominant story. Tordrey joenks (talk) 09:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Keith. I thoroughly read the two books on the matter mentioned, and was left with this clear impression that the decision to stop so much military spending was the action of the new--and first ever--Socialist party government, who prioritized its people's every day lives over military spending. The strategic angle on stopping the Maginot line worked as well, and I believe that it became the dominant story. Tordrey joenks (talk) 09:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The French wanted to fight another war in Belgium and killed two birds with one stone by fortifying the common border, on the basis that a soldier in a fortified position had the effect of seven in the open. The Maginot Line allowed the army to use 1/7th of the manpower it would have needed without fortifications. This meant that the army could afford to armour, mechanise and motorise the field army, safe in the knowledge that it would fight on a relatively narrow front. Given the difference in population sizes this was logical. The French socialists were sell-outs as usual, which is the job of socialist parteis and didn't last long before it was far-right as ususal. By 1939 French and British rearmament was catching up with the German rearmament that began in 1930 and no-one expected the Germans to win in six weeks. As Moltke the Elder had said, a mistake in the initial deployment can hardly be remedied during a campaign. It was the Breda Variant that did for the French, not decadence. I commend you on reading the books but it might do you good to read several more to see the evolution of opinions about the reasons for the Allied defeat and the incomplete victory of the Germans. Regards. Keith-264 (talk) 11:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your text: "These units ultimately are the ones that were quickly defeated during the coming invasion. The modernized armored forces fared quite well against Germany's panzers. However the holes in the French line created by the more obsolete armored units enabled the Germans to surround the modernized French units..." is misleading. The DCrs could not have been equipped with a more modern type, because the production capacity was simply lacking, given the state of the French industry. No amount of money could have remedied this, unless France would not have disarmed in the early 1920s. Whether they would have fared any better with more or more modern tanks is also very doubtful. Their main weakness was their intended tactical rôle as breakthrough units.--MWAK (talk) 06:34, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg)
