Talk:Battle of the Somme

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:Australia: Military history Low‑importance

	Battle of the Somme is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Military history: South Pacific / British / Canadian / European / French / German / North America / World War I

	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.
	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces: /  Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force British military history task force Canadian military history task force European military history task force French military history task force German military history task force North American military history task force World War I task force

France Low‑importance

	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.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany Low‑importance

	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.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Northern Ireland High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern Ireland 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.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pritzker Military Library High‑importance

	This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

New Zealand High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-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.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Infobox question

"315,000 in 10​ 1⁄2" (divisions) ? 31,500 men per division? Seems a bit dodgy. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 09:43, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

30,000 in a division, so ten of them is 300,000, then a half divison adds another 15,000. (10.5 X 30,000 = 315,000)77Mike77 (talk) 19:16, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Infobox (result)

The outcome of the battle as stated in the infobox is quite misleading considering the lack of consensus about it. Deeming most of the Entente objectives in the battle to have been achieved is surprising. It does neither reflect the content, nor the sources linked in the article. (Jules Agathias (talk) 14:41, 1 July 2021 (UTC))

Good. Nice to see that piece of nonsense has been fixed.Paulturtle (talk) 20:51, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Simkins 2003

@DuncanHill: G'day, Duncan, hope you are well. Reference your here, potentially Simkins 2003 might be: Simkins, P.; Jukes, G.; Hickey, M. (2003). The First World War: The War to End All Wars. Oxford: Osprey. ISBN 978-1-84176-738-3. Unfortunately, I don't know for sure, though. Can anyone else assist? Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 05:09, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

@AustralianRupert: Thanks - I went further back through the article history, found it was added by an IP which had also edited Operation Alberich at the same time, and found the same sentence, referenced to the work you mention, there. Have now added it here. This is a common problem with harv/sfn references. DuncanHill (talk) 14:39, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

G'day, Duncan, thanks for following it up. Hope you are having a safe and happy Christmas. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 02:05, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

German casualties in the infobox

Since it seems to be a point of contention recently, does anyone know where the higher German casualties come from? The 10 day loss reports and other data from the Reichsarchiv support the 420,000 number, I can only find suppositional accounts from British authors supporting 600,000. An exception is Alexander Watson's "Ring of Steel" which is a British book but goes through the 10 day reports for the relevant German armies and also arrives at around a ~420,000 figure. It seems odd to have official British and French losses represented in the infobox alongside more speculative losses for the German side, although the high German figure seems appropriate for the casualties section. If my understanding is correct the Edmonds view that all German losses have to be increased by 30%, if thats where this orignates, has been contested by both the German archives and by Churchill in his book. Thx Roddy the roadkill (talk) 03:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Long and short term consequences of the Battle of the Somme

What were the long and short term consequences of the Battle of the Somme? 131.242.7.31 (talk) 04:36, 3 October 2023 (UTC)