Talk:21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Author of the Article

I'm not a serb, I have dual citizenship to the United States and Spain. The source material is not Serbian either, it's British. So until you provide YOUR OWN verifiable material, your edits are going to be COTINOUSLY reverted. JonCatalan 18:29, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Now, it says that the division's original intentions were to purify the race. The division was created by the Germans; specifically, under the orders of Heinrich Himmler. There is nothing false, and indeed, it would only make sense. The only sentence that says that the division actually carried out its task is the final sentence, and it would become notorious for murder. But that's not to say it was the only thing killing at the time. There were dozens of Serbian groups and fighters that massacred Macedonians, Albanians and Croats during the war as well. But you cannot edit the article, vandalize it, and claim that it's all written under Serbian nationalism, when it's simply untrue. Please, have a bit more etiquette. JonCatalan 19:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I have marked the article as vprotected because vandalism. I also suspect sockpuppetry at work of the like going on the Kosovo article. Asterion 18:51, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Jon Catalan

That book of Chris Bishop is published just recently (in 2005) in an attempt to revision the history. But given that books with historical distortions do not have a wide range of readers, you seem to act as a marketing manager of Chris Bishop to advertise his book on Wikipedia.

I now start refuting your comments. About Ottoman Empire: have a look at what you have written (I am copying your original text): The division arm patch consisted of a black double-headed eagle on a red background, and the division was named after George Kastrioti Skanderbeg (1405 - 1468), who was renamed Iskander Bey after fighting for the Turks, who captured him earlier. He later led the unsuccessful attempt at Albanian independence against the Ottomans. Now, have a look at my previous comments about who captured him earlier. Whether Chris Bishop or you are saying so, it does not matter. What matters is that it is a lie. You have also received a remark by someone, not in the talk page but in your text, about Skanderbeg’s unsuccessful attempt at Albanian independence against the Ottomans, who told you: who writes this stuff, Skanderbeg fought and won against Ottomans for 25 years. Had Skanderbeg not been successful we won’t see Serbs speaking Serbian today. Come on let’s be serious, he concluded.

You also wrote that the task of the division was to establish a pure Albanian race in the region, among others, free of Jews. By the way, have you clicked on the link that I provided in my previous comment about the relation between Albanians and the Jews during WWII? Is that a CREDIBLE source? For you it may be not, for the rest of the world it is. You know why? Because it is written not by Chris Bishop, any Spaniard like you, but by a Jew called Haroey Samer who titled his thorough and detailed investigation Rescue In Albania: One Hundred Percent Of Jews In Albania Rescued From Holocaust, published by Brunswick Press, California, 1997. If you want to read it click here http://www.aacl.com/index11.html

Kosovo had the highest Jewish survival during WWII after Albania in occupied territories by Axis. Of total 520 Jews in Kosovo on the eve of WWII, 320 or over 60% survived (Source: read the book of Cambridge Professor Noel Malcolm, Kosovo: A Short History, New York University Press; New Update edition (November 2000).

You or Chris Bishop (it does not matter who) wrote that: It was originally designed to combat partisans in Yugoslavia, but it was used early on to massacre Orthodox Serbs in Kosovo, forcing over ten thousand families to flee north, and allowing ethnic Albanian farmers to settle in their stead. To prove that just the opposite has happened, you should not read any other book of Chris Bishop, but the facts published by some Serb scholars. Here is one source: Obradovič, Milovan (1981), Agrarna Reforma i Kolonizacija na Kosovu 1918-1941, (meaning: Agrarian Reform and Colonization in Kosova 1918-1941), Institut za Istoriju Kosova, Priština. This is a PhD dissertation showing who was massacring who, who grabbed the land of Albanians in Kosovo, who was fleeing from the terror to Turkey, and many more. The book is in Serbian and follows a vast number of Serb families by names and last names, their location where they came from to settle in Kosovo in the land taken by terror. Agrarian reform and kolonization continued until 1999.

Who needs more CREDIBLE sources?

I will revert your writing on this topic as long as an administrator allows you to post inaccurate things for marketing purposes, i.e. promote the book of Chris Bishop. By the way, I am an economist and know marketing better than you and Chris Bishop.

Isa Mulaj

Jewish population

The article said:

Not one Jew was handed over in Albania itself, which was the only country to come out of the second world war with a larger Jewish population than it had at the beginning of the war.

I've changed it to:

Not one Jew was handed over in Albania itself, which was the only Nazi-occupied country to come out of the second world war with a larger Jewish population than it had at the beginning of the war.

This corresponds with statement on the AACL website[1], and is probably what was intended to be said in the first place. Jews were obviously not deported from Allied countries that were not occupied. -- Arvind 15:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Well Albania wasn't occupied by the Germans but by Italians, who unlike the Germans didn't demand Jews to be rounded up, so the fact that Jews in Albania had a high survival rate is hardly a surprise. In any case, this information is irrelevent to this article, because the SS Skanderbeg operated in Kosovo, not Albania, and consisted of Albanians from Kosovo. So events that occured in Albania do not belong in this article. Edrigu 20:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Weeell, Germany occupied Albania on September 1943 after Italy surrendered and pretty much controlled the country until November 1944, so it seems you were WRONG. Do you double-check before posting such nonesense or is this how you always act? Presenting information as if it is undesputed fact? - PG-Rated 04:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

POV -sources

Article states "In Kosovo, the division embarked on ethnic cleansing of the Serbs and other non-Albanians." and gives two sources. Unfortunately, both of them ([2], [3]) are extremely non-neutral pro-Serbian pages. Article should really has more neutral sources for such a strong claim. BTW: The fact that this was a SS-division doesn't necessarily mean it did ethnic cleaning or other heavy human rights violations (allthought chances may be good it did). For example a SS-battalion formed from Finnish volunteers haven't been connected to human rights violations. --ML (talk) 16:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

More objections

One more objection. In further reading, there are more books, articles and sources that doesn’t relate to this article or its subject. This article speaks about one of the SS divisions.

How can this book Milovan Obradovič, Agrarna Reforma i Kolonizacija na Kosovu 1918-1941, Institut za Istoriju Kosova, Priština (1981) be considered as further reading when it doesn’t talk about Second World War, or Waffen SS. As its title said it covers historical period before the division was founded.

Second, how this source Haroey Samer, Rescue In Albania: One Hundred Percent Of Jews In Albania Rescued From Holocaust, Brunswick Press, California (1997) relate to the article when it covers rescue of the Jews in Albania. The division was formed in Kosovo, from Kosovo Albanians and it didn’t participate in rescuing the Jews.

Third this article The Jews, the Serbs, and the Truth by Stephen Schwartz talks about Serbs and Jews, not about Kosovo, Waffen SS, Albanians or anything else that has connection to this article.

I suggest that these books and article should be deleted from the chapter further reading since no other article about SS divisions has such a diversity of unrelated sources and references. --Marko M 12:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

---

I removed the link to an article on frontpagemag.com because I found another which is more precise. The article claimed that SS Skanderbeg turned 210 Jews to Nazis, which is oversimplification because, as the more detailed Serbianna article shows, 281 Jews were turned of which 210 were killed. Nikola 23:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

---

"I removed the link to an article on frontpagemag.com because I found another which is more precise." You print it from Serbianna, and you call that precise? Keep it Fake (talk) 01:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Use of sources

I have added a POV template because the sources used in the article are all Serbian and we do not know if the information provided in the sources is accurate. With the Albanian- Serbian conflict still going on, I believe many of the sources used in the article are not neutral and they were written for propaganda purposes. The whole article should be rewritten based on neutral sources and not on articles written by biased Serbian self-declared historians. --Noah30 (talk) 07:11, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

-- One needs to read what this character Savich (a Serb nationalist), who calls himself a historian writes: "The uniforms and the acronyms have changed from the Waffen SS to NATO and the political sponsors have changed from Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini and Heinrich Himmler to Bill Clinton and Tony Blair and Madeleine Albright, but the Greater Albania ideology remains exactly the same, identical to that enunciated by the 1943 Second League of Prizren, and the 1878 First League of Prizren." http://www.kosovo.net/news/archive/2004/July_23/2.html

Should he be used as a source?

Keep it Fake (talk) 01:40, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

---

On the Serb site this is the text: (notice how it starts with an inflammatory headline only to show that Jews is Serbia had it much worst. Did they cut and paste too fast?)

"Albanian extremists target the Jews of Kosovo

At the beginning of the second world war, Kosovo had a population of 550 Jews. Altogether, 210 perished in German concentration camps - the only Jews to be killed in the war in Kosovo - representing 38.18% of the Jewish population. This compares with Belgrade, were only 1,115 survived the war out of almost 12,000 (9%), and Croatia, where an estimated 25% of the Jewish population survived. Thus, you were more likely to survive the war if you were Jewish and lived in Albania or Kosovo rather than Belgrade or Croatia. However, this is not to say that it was any easier for Jews, Roma or Slavs - the three national groups designated by the Nazi's as "subhuman races", and top of their list for extermination or deportation by the Nazis or their quislings in Croatia, Serbia and Kosovo.

In fact, one of the first acts of the SS Skanderbeg division in April 1944 was the arresting of 281 Jews in Pristina, and "510 Jews, Communists, Partisans and individual suspects". According to Bernard J. Fischer, writing in Albania at War, 1939-1945 (Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, Indians, USA, 1999, p. 187). All 281 Jews were deported to Germany - probably to Bergen-Belsen death camp. However, the German occupation authorities allowed Albania an unusual degree of autonomy and, for the most part, refrained from deporting and/or murdering the majority of Albanian Jews. Most of the tiny Jewish population of "old Albania" (about 200) survived the Holocaust. The Germans, however, confiscated most Jewish-owned property in 1943-1944."

This entire article is based on Carl Savich--a known Serb apologist--and this .yu site. I will post a check for accuracy tag as well. If true, they should state the fact and where they got the info from; throwing numbers around in a politically sensitive topic to make one side look bad should not be allowed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keep it Fake (talk • contribs) 07:07, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

NPOV

Unless you cite books or neutral sites this will be reversed. Citing Serb sources and using unsubstantiated "Muslims killed all Jews" in light of what's going on today in Serbia /Kosovo will be reversed. Cite or leave it alone. Keep it Fake (talk) 20:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

reverts

Could someone at least clarify why the sourced info here is removed? I am certainly not trying to defend the SS or the Albanians, but good reasons must be named for the removal of referenced info. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 22:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The references promote a common misconception. The colonization program was unsuccessful, and nearly all colonized families were forced out of Kosovo before WWII started. Serbs who were killed or forced out of Kosovo by SS Skanderbeg were indigenous Serb population, not the colonists. Nikola (talk) 20:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Not really Nikola. Why did Tito pass the law NOT to allow settlers to come back? Who forced them out before WWII??? Because they were there and thrown out. The colonization failed because Albanians had more children and settlers didn't change the numbers that much. See "The Expulsion of Albanians" or this:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Fnbw1wsacSAC&pg=PA191&dq=serb+settlers+wwii+kosovo+italians&sig=_-xAaonJ7rOR7SDQ31mFEgTLwEA

http://books.google.com/books?id=GghxFpyBH7MC&pg=PA144&dq=serb+settlers+wwii+kosovo+italians+serbian&sig=Fcvk0F57-3J5X26IFLqta8GYbS8

(after talking about land confiscation from Albanians and driving out 50K Albanians she states) "The tables were turned during WWII...(ejected an estimated 70K) of the newly arrived settlers"

Let's not play games. I know and you know, the didn't give a rats @ss about Nazis, just as Chetniks didn't. Keep it Fake (talk) 15:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC) ok I understand, that should be included and explained, but the sources are not biased (at first glance), and the removal of the quotes is against Wiki policy. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 21:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Sources missing

Ok, where can I find the sources, especially for the last paragraph? I am putting this article on the notice board.--_Arbër ^{T •  ?} 11:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello all. I hope that we can keep this peaceful. Some are concerned that the article is too -- aggressive -- for lack of a better word. I however believe it omits a lot. Although this is not a neutral source, and for some may not be credible, please see the "Mike Savage discusses Kosovo" video on YouTube. The beginning discusses the 21st SS division. I believe that it is important to keep accuracy in history. I also want to note that there is NO nation that doesn't have it's blemishes. Signed: Mira, 11:36, 07 July 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirakres (talk • contribs)

Division of 6000?

I am adding a half division. 6500 joined and they deserted within weeks. Divisions are 10,000 to 20,000 troops Keep it Fake (talk) 22:23, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

---

I do not think that the information of this article is entirely accurate. It seems like a sincere effort to induce people into a personal line of reasoning without concerning itself too much with historical accuracy.

It is true that the Germans constituted the division along the same lines that saw the emergence of other foreign SS units. However, the Albanians of Kosovo knew nothing and cared nothing about the National Socialist policies of Hitler. Instead they used the opportunity to take revenge on the Serb and Montenegrin population that was settled in Kosovo between 1920-1938. While in itself a despicable action, this was a response to the colonialist policies of the central government in Belgrade. Their main motivation was revenge and a naive hope that the Germans were friends that would bring about a permanent change in the region.

As a military unit the Division's role is debatable. Being constituted as a force to be engaged in anti-partisan operation it had an initial membership of 6,500 (plus change). Within two months more that 3,500 deserted as they didn't want to be deployed in areas away from home (meaning village or city). The Germans ever since had trouble in keeping up with the numbers. Eventually they gave up, disbanded the division and rolled up the remainder of those who decided to stay in the Kampfgruppe Skanderbeg attched to SS-Gebirgs-Division "Prinz Eugen". This detachment saw action in Serbia, Bosnia and some members found their way to Austria.

On a final note, the internet contains very few pages written about this Albanian SS Division. Virtually all of them are Serbian sources which, in light of the Albanian-Serbian animosity make hardly credible sources. If the division was as cruel as the writer of the article suggests it was, then sources other than Serbian would have been available. There aren't (at least as many as there are for other SS Divisions) The German or Allied sources would have mentioned it and memebers would have been brought to international justice. As it happens, they were not.

Well, I'd disagree. You say that "Albanians of Kosovo knew nothing and cared nothing about the National Socialist policies of Hitler" - how could anyone live in Europe of the time and not know that? You say that their main motivation was revenge - a revenge to what? Nikola 17:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

---

I am not saying that you shouldn't state their deeds, but the way the article portrays them is akin to Einsatzgruppen, o sort of Totenkopf verbande unit which clearly they were not

If you regard the Kosovar-Albanians of the time as deeply indoctrinated people, politically savvy, and ideologically compatible with Nazi policies than reality escapes you, to say the least. One thing motivated them and thats a fact, research it if you must would be as I mentioned it the revenge toward the Serbian policy of colonizing Kosovo. Kosovo may be the heartleand of the Serbian nation - that's an entirely different discussion, but it is also a fact that Albanians, at the time, still a majority in Kosovo, were suffering from the policies of Belgrade in bringing in on regular basis colonials from inner Serbia to replace the lands made vacant from the forceful removal and deportation of the Albanians in Turkey. Then there were the economic incentives created for these colonials at the expanse of the ALbanians.

Former mayor of Vienna and Ribentropp's special counsel for Southeastern Europe Hermann Neubacher states during the initial phases of training the division was poorly led and performed terribly against the partisans. Also they prefered to rob and fight their "traditional enemy" (I believe Serbs are implied) rather than fight along military lines. Coupled with massive desertions, the disappoinment was so great that by the end of 1944 the division was disbanded. Having been conceived in February 1944, suffering major desertion in October and being disbanded, lets say, December; in addition of being led by Germans (to whom the petty differences between serb and albanian farmer would have been of little importance) I really doubt their worth as both a military and police force. Yes they did enagage in some atrocities, but I dont think you should put this out of context given the bad blood between Albanians and Serbs at the time. Therefore I wouyld call this revenge. Again, dont ask "how could anyone live in Europe of the time and not know that??" That is not a realistic question. A population, steeped into feudal patterns, virtually illiterate, completely cut off the influence of Western civ.,... even if they knew it, they wouldnt have cared about it.

Bernd J. Fischer, an author who wrote about it reports Germans were popular in Albania, but the majority didn.t believe in the final victory of the Axis. They respected Hitler, but abhorred fascism. It is ironic to read such contradictory viewpoints. In fact the respect of the ALbanians for the Germans came from the times of the WWI when the Austrian-Hungarian armies had accoupied large tarritories of Albania.

---

I could agree with some of your points, but I don't think that the article says what you say it says. For example, when you say above that "Albanians of Kosovo knew nothing and cared nothing about the National Socialist policies of Hitler" - I disagree, but anyway, it is not stated in the article. And I don't regard Kosovo Albanians of the time as deeply indoctrinated, but the article doesn't say that, either. And so on. Nikola 09:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Again, I am not against the accusations that Albanians killed Serbs and Montenegrins during their unification stint with Albania proper. It is highly unrealistic to expect the contrary especially since for the last 70 years or so Albanians and Slavs just vented at each other. The Serb retreat in 1915 thru Albania is another example. However, I am against the general feel of the article which makes Albanians appear as they are indoctrinated Nazi Einsatzgruppen. The artticle doesn't state this, but the reader is left with such an emotion. In order to prevent inaccuracies, I would add, since it is your article, the reasons behind that prompted the creation of the division, why they were so dead-set against the Serbs and Montenegrins, and so on and forth. One more thing, what make you disagree with the quation?

---

I did not write this article; most of it is written by User:Catalan. I don't think that the article has such feel, but if you do, edit the article, and change it, and I will tell you if you disagree.

By the way, when on talk page, you should sign your text with ~~~~. Nikola 07:32, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Hoax and propaganda

"SS Skanderbeg" was formed from a Albanian battalion from SS Handzar with only few houndred soldiers, they tried forced recruition but they failed because all true Albanian patriots were anti nazi, all those numbers with 5000 soldiers or more are all false.

After the war Jugoslavian propaganda first said that the number of this division was 40000, then after this number seemed ridiculous they changed the number to 10000, now it is from 1500 to 5000. While there exist many photos from all other SS divisions even of Serbian SS soldiers, there are no photos of "SS Skanderbeg" the few ones that are supposed to be from "SS Skanderbeg" are either false or presumed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.229.106.225 (talk) 00:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Provide sources plz --Vinie007 14:37, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Waffen Division of the SS not Waffen SS Division.

This is not a Waffen SS Division, but a Division of the SS. Only units made up of ethnic germanic people were Waffen SS Divisions. The units of the 21st Division of the SS did not wear SS collars. --85.235.22.79 (talk) 14:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

War Crimes

I am going to add a "war crimes" section to this page. There is alot that is missing and I have reliable sources. --MoravaiDrina (talk) 18:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

go right ahead, but provide inline citations from your refs. Peacemaker67 (talk) 18:56, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Objection

It’s shame that article about SS division contains information about saving the Jews. I didn’t know anything about this humanitarian aspect of SS. I think that these information should be excluded from this article.

I believe that Albanian families who participated in saving the Kosovo Jews in World War II do not deserve to be mentioned together with members of SS. They deserve special article that will talk about their humanity. All the members of Wikipedia who want to write on this subject can find relevant information on official website of United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Washington DC. --Marko M 10:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Sources other than the biased Zionist organisations are available. The simple fact is that Jews in Albania where not targeted for special persecution. While the Balkans have had their share of pogroms, during WWII there was so much acrimoniousness between the different and more numerous ethnic and militant groups that the Jewish minority fortunately passed relatively unscathed. The fact that a SS unit was not involved in anti-Jewish persecution is noteworthy in view of the post-war propaganda by the liberal and Jewish-influenced media 85.247.228.162 (talk) 05:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

what are you talking about? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:02, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Removal of material sourced from Lemkin in Background

G'day, I'm a bit concerned that relevant material sourced from Raphael Lemkin has been removed from the Background section. See this version of the article [4]. Also, I suggest this article is pushed through a MILHIST B Class review via Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Requests before the GAN starts. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

If you can add any sources and do anything else to improve the article further then please go right ahead. 23 editor (talk) 04:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

It also appears material from Lepre has been removed? Particularly the details about why the division was raised and the Albanian battalion in 13th SS Division. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 08:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Use of quotes from Schmidhuber etc

Given that Fischer states essentially that Schmidhuber and others were blaming the Albanians for their own failure to create an effective security force, when less-involved Wehrmacht staff said the principal problem was the fact that the the Germans didn't engage properly with the Albanians, it seems a bit rich (and POV) to include quotes by those most responsible for the problem. I propose summarising the blame-game and dispensing with the quotes. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Fitzthum as divisional commander?

I don't believe Fitzthum ever commanded the division. As Higher SS and Police Leader in Albania he recruited and trained men for the formation of the division between April and June 1944, but listing him as a commander is a big stretch. Elsie's biographical dictionary of Albanian history, p. 144 here doesn't mention him commanding the division. Tomasevich says the division was commanded by Schmidhuber, as does Fischer. I don't rate Mitcham all that highly as a source, but he says Schmidhuber was the only permanent commander of the division but mentions Graf (sic) reported serving briefly as acting division commander here. I'm going to remove the commanders section and explain more about who recruited and trained the men, who commanded it in the text. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 14:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg (1st Albanian)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 17:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll get to this shortly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

• The survivors were incorporated: it was disbanded on 1 November 1944 and was incorporated into the 7th SS
• This is awkward. Do you mean "mainly taken from"... Also the reader already knows that the banovinas were Yugoslav. And what's a banovina, explain or link. Italian Albania was expanded to include adjacent parts of Yugoslavia mainly excised from the Yugoslav banovinas
• Also awkward. And was Kosovo part of the above mentioned banovinas? With the region of Kosovo being annexed to Albania, Kosovo Albanians welcomed the Italian occupation enthusiastically.
• The article needs a good copyedit. Please contact Diannaa (talk · contribs) or anyone from the WP:GOCE|Guild of Copyeditors for assistance and let me know once it has been edited so I can continue this review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:58, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  •  Done -- Dianna (talk) 02:28, 25 May 2013 (UTC) I have now done two passes and am satisfied the prose meets the GA guideline. If there's a lot more new material added another pass might be required. -- Dianna (talk) 17:35, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Thanks for taking this on so quickly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:37, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Brillant, I'll look at this later today.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:52, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

• The last sentence of the last para in the Background section needs to be removed unless a cite can be found that supports the statements. P. 165 of Lepre doesn't not refer to anything other than the use of I./28 as a cadre for the division. Page number(s) to support the formation of the Albanian battalion need to be added.
• Change disarm division battalions to "disarm battalions of the division"

Done.

• Clarify this to ensure that the reader understands that both the division and the kampgruppe withdrew: The division withdrew across the Drina
• Not thrilled about the uniform picture. Can't you find a picture of division members in combat or on parade or something that will be copyright free?

I've added a picture of the division's recruiting poster.

• Capitalize the entire title of Kumm's book.

Done.

• Brigadeführer etc. is overlinked.

Fixed.

• Neuhammer needs to be disambiguated.

Done. 23 editor (talk) 00:52, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

• External links good as are picture licenses.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:34, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
• Don't forget my point about the last sentence of the last para in the background section above. It's the last thing that needs to be addressed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:09, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

• Sorry about that Sturm, I was curious to see where that came from and it took some finding. Way before my time...[5]! I re-instated it verbatim after the Lepre refs were removed... whoops. Anywho, gone now and I fixed the Lepre ref to the recruitment of the Albanians. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 06:30, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Use of Mitcham (Stackpole Books)

I have thus far avoided using Mitcham because the publisher is not well-thought-of in respect of editorial oversight. I suggest we find another source for Schmidhuber's execution. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Tomasevich

Does anyone know if Tomasevich mentions anything about the Skanderbeg division and its participation in Operation Draufgänger in his book War and Revolution in Yugoslavia, 1941-1945: The Chetniks? 23 editor (talk) 15:50, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I've got a copy, I'll have a look. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:54, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I checked the online accessible Google Books one and it is clear there is something on pp. 409-410 but 409 is not available online. It will be a couple of days before I will get a chance to look at the paper copy. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:22, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Map

Given the Skanderbeg div was raised after the Italian surrender, the map is really not chronologically appropriate. What about the recruiting poster that used to be in the article? I don't think there is a 1944 location map for Albania that could be used. This may not be an obstacle to GA but it will impede A-Class. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 07:40, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Go for it. 23 editor (talk) 11:39, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Identification symbol

Would anyone object if I added the Albanian double-headed eagle as the division's identification symbol? 23 editor (talk) 15:25, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

There is already one in the infobox which is consistent with the symbol as shown in Keegan. I'm not sure why we would replace the one we have. It is consistent with other division's insignia in size and format. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 15:30, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

MILHIST A Class Review?

I reckon this is ready for MILHIST ACR? Thoughts? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:14, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Great idea. I think we should go for it. 23 editor (talk) 13:30, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Co-nomination? I'll do the honours if you like? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:34, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

That would be wonderful. 23 editor (talk) 13:37, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

We might have to work on the licence for the recruiting poster. I assume it was produced by Berger's people at the SS Recruiting Office, so it must have been published (ie stuck up on trees and noticeboards) in 1944. I'll try tweaking the licence, then nominate it on our behalf. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:51, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

The poster doesn't look too good. The only online versions I can find are these [6] [7] (right at the bottom of the 2nd page). Not that you would take these guys word for it, but it looks really suspect. I reckon we bin it. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 14:05, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Alright, but what would we replace it with? 23 editor (talk) 14:23, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

I thought I might have seen a pic of some troops of the Albanian battalion from Handschar somewhere. I'll have to search around and see if I can turn it up. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 14:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Section

I was thinking it would be a good idea to add a Legacy section in the article. According to several books I've seen, it would appear that any mention of the division was prohibited in Hoxha's post-war Communist Albania. I think this should definitely be mentioned. Thoughts? 23 editor (talk) 16:53, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I'm happy with that (just make sure they are RS, I know there has been all sorts of nonsense written about it and the 13th by people like Savich). Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 22:21, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Upon closer inspection, I'd say the book shouldn't be used (it doesn't appear to be written by an academic). However, I'll write up a Legacy section anyway outlining how the division was considered a failure, how its role in war crimes is interpreted by an Albanian historian, as well as some comments from journalist Chris Hedges about the division. Regards, 23 editor (talk) 02:20, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Great, looks fine. The Malcolm citation doesn't point to the ref though. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 03:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:49, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Salute

Would it be appropriate to term the Mufti's greeting as seen on the picture in the article as being a Nazi salute? Or is his greeting just a kind of wave? Thoughts? 23 editor (talk) 22:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

It probably was an attempt to emulate a Nazi salute, as there are other pics of him doing a more rigid armed version. But, unless a reliable source for the photograph describes it as such, it would be original research to term it as a Nazi salute, given he was not a Nazi himself (despite his political alliance with them during the war). I don't think this is a WP:BLUE issue, so I think we need a source. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 00:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, I'll see if I can dig anything up. 23 editor (talk) 00:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Re: On the Mufti's own Wikipedia article, there is a pic of him giving the salute to members of the Handschar division. The caption terms it a "Nazi salute" and this bit is sourced with a book by Robert Fisk, titled The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East. What do you think? 23 editor (talk) 01:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

If we used that photo instead, I agree that would be ok. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:25, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Monument

This article from 2005 indicates that the Pristina municipality intends to erect a monument to the division, as well as the Second League of Prizren. Should this be mentioned under the "Legacy" section? 23 editor (talk) 23:03, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Can't say I'm a fan of glas-javnosti (in terms of its bona fides as a reliable source). I have avoided using it myself in the past except for non-controversial information like how many children someone had or their wife's name, that type of thing, and the odd bit of historical information not available elsewhereand a few articles I've worked on have used it. The language is highly inflammatory (at least in Google Translate) and appears quite partisan. It would be useful to have some corroboration from a more reliable source before adding material of this type, but when I looked, all I could find was similar quality stuff on serbianna, juliagorin and rastko. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 01:45, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Aryan Ghegs

There are some sources which say that Himmler based the recruitment of Gheg Albanians on racial theories which considered them as Aryans) also supported by some Italian anthropological researches. One of the sources is: Jonathan Trigg (1 April 2009). Hitler's Jihadis: Muslim volunteers of the Waffen-SS. History Press. p. 146. ISBN 978-1-86227-487-7. Retrieved 22 July 2013. ...sought to show the Ghegs of the north (in the south Albanians were from the Tosk tribe) were actually Aryans, this was.... --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:49, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

this is an interesting point. Both Lepre and Bishop and Williams say that (and I am paraphrasing here) "it appears that Himmler accepted the theories advanced by both Croatian and German nationalists that the Croatian people, including the Muslims, were not ethnic Slavs but pure Aryans of either Gothic or Iranian descent". This is included in the 13th SS article, but relates to Croatian people (defined by the Ustashas and Germans as including Bosnian Muslims). The book and author appear on face value to be WP:RS, and given the book is not available in Google Preview (to me at least), and I am unable to read the statement in context, I suggest you add the material to the article yourself. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 13:41, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Here is the context of the statement: "Himmler himself, as the architect of Skanderbeg, was happy with recruitment from northern "Greater Albania" as it conformed to his racial ideals. During their occupation the Italians had carried out spurious 'anthropological research' that sought to show the Ghegs of the north (in the south Albanians were from the Tosk tribe) were actually Aryans, this was music to the Reichsfuhrer's ears." (link). --Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:22, 22 July 2013 (UTC)}

This is definitely a good point, and I think that German/Italian racial views regarding the Albanians should be included in the article just as German racial views of the Croats and B::osnian Muslims are included in the 13th SS Division article. 23 editor (talk) 15:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Not opposed to it, I just believe that nothing prevents an editor that raises an issue from adding it to an article, and I like to read the whole page (or more) of the source before adding it myself, so I know the whole context. So either of you can go right ahead as far as I am concerned, if you are comfortable with the source and the context. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 23:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done

No. The point here was that recruitment of Gheg Albanians into this unit was based on belief of some Nazi officers that Ghegs are Aryans. Addition (diff) of Illyrian myth of Albanian nationalists into this article is not only unrelated but opens another bigger issue (wp:undue).--Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:55, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Actually, yes. In whose opinion, Ad? Your opinion? I asked for a reliable source (in context). 23 has had a crack at that. Of course, as usual, you are completely free to add this information if you have a reliable source for it, but once again, you have failed to do so. Please stop with the vague nitpicking, and actually edit an article (for a change of pace...), if you think you have a reliable source for your suggested edit. Then the community can judge the quality of your sources. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 09:15, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

• My comment was about addition (diff) of Illyrian hypothesis into this article which:
  • is not related to the topic of this article
  • opens another issue (wp:undue)
  • has nothing to do with my proposed edit so this section should not be marked as done.
• Is there any particular reason for another (one of probably hundreds by now) unnecessarily harsh comment you write to me? I believe that there is no excuse for your behavior. Your actions made editing of many articles unpleasant for me and discouraged me from further editing. In order to avoid being subjected to this kind of treatment this will be my last comment in this article. All the best --Antidiskriminator (talk) 10:42, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

• Ad. Your comment, like so many others of your comments, lacks a source with proper context (once again). This is not a surprise, yet you appear offended. This is quite a strange reaction, IMO. You regularly turn up on the talk pages of articles I edit, cast aspersions on the content, but utterly fail to produce reliable sources (in proper context) to support your comments, or make any attempt to actually edit the articles in question yourself. For me this is not new. Others, coming here for the first time, might think I was being far too harsh. But an examination of your past behaviour and our past interaction would set them straight, of that I have no doubt. Please take it elsewhere. I am confident that an examination by the community of your behaviour will result in sanctions against you, not me. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:38, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Ottoman Turks?

The article describes Skanderbeg as "...Albanian national hero .... who fought the Ottoman Turks in the 15th century"

The part "who fought the Ottoman Turks in the 15th century" is simplification which should be removed, or at least Turks replaced with Ottomans.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:18, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

And your reliable scholarly source is? Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:20, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Is there a need for source to differ Roman Empire from Italy, and Byzantine Empire from Greece? The same as Holy Roman Empire vs Germans or British Empire vs English? Most of the Ottoman leaders that Scanderbeg fought against were actually of Albanian descent, i.e. Ballaban Pasha.
Mondiad (talk) 19:12, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Balli Kombetar

Balli Kombetar according to plenty of sources collaborated with the Nazis. Not with Fascist Italians though, the statement that the Nazis engaged previous collaborators of the Italians such as Balli Kombetar, etc should be corrected.
The article Albanian resistance during World War II clearly states them on the Nazi side from 1943 and on the other side before 1943.
Mondiad (talk) 19:17, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

You're going to need a reliable scholarly source to even have that version of events included in the article. Tomasevich is highly reliable academic source, and his version of events will remain. You can't use WP articles as a reference, that would be WP:CIRCULAR. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 21:36, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Operations ?

Maybe Operations, war crimes?Xx236 (talk) 06:07, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Oder–Neisse vs police regiment

This text is unclear:

The men from II Battalion fought with the Prinz Eugen until February 1945, when they were sent north to defend the Oder–Neisse line.[61] That month, the battalion was disbanded altogether and its remaining manpower was assigned to the German police regiment near Zagreb.

It sounds like the sequence for II Battalion in February 1945 was...

1. fighting in Yugoslavia alongside Prinz Eugen
2. defending the Oder–Neisse line
3. police regiment near Zagreb

...but that seems implausible. Did they really go all the way north to Oder-Neisse only to come back down south weeks later? jnestorius^(talk) 12:43, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Details in Stein are sparse, but the article doesn't actually say they did any fighting on the Oder line, only that they were sent north. Tomasevich provides more detail, and he is the one that says they were re-assigned to Zagreb. I think I'll pull the Oder line information from Stein out and put it in a note. Thanks for the comment. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 14:11, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 15 May 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. EdJohnston (talk) 19:00, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

---

21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg (1st Albanian) → 21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg – There are no other articles that could be referred to as "21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg", therefore the parenthetical disambiguator is unnecessary. For an example of an article about a military division that has rightly avoided unnecessary disambiguation, see 24th Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Karstjäger. Neelix (talk) 20:04, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

• Support per WP:MILMOS#UNITNAME. Its recommendation for pre-disambiguation is questionable, but fortunately not an issue here. This unit's name is "clearly unique" and does not need disambiguation. Many other members of Category:Foreign volunteer units of the Waffen-SS already don't have superfluous disambiguators; at a glance, some of the others can safely drop theirs. --BDD (talk) 20:28, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
• Support per above. Khestwol (talk) 21:50, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Comment, it appears many other SS Divisions at Template:SS Divisions also need more WP:CONCISE titles. They all should have WP:CONSISTENCY in their title pattern. Khestwol (talk) 22:03, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

• Comment if you want short names, any one of "21st Waffen SS Division", "1st Albanian Waffen SS Division", or "Skanderbeg Waffen SS Division" would do. I can never tell whether a Wikiproject outside my fields of knowledge is applying WP:COMMONNAME in a correct manner not obvious to the uninitated, or just has a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS to ignore WP:COMMONNAME and do something fancy for some nerdview reason. jnestorius^(talk) 21:53, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
• Comment (1st Albanian) isn't disambiguation, it is part of the translation of the official name. The reason Karstjager doesn't have it is because the division didn't have one as part of its name. But some of the comments here reflect a lack of knowledge of the subject. This is one of four Balkan Waffen divisions of the SS I've helped get to FA, and so far as I know, they are the only SS divisions at FA. The comments about about consistency and what other "short" name structures would be acceptable show a lack of understanding about the structure of these "foreign" SS division names. SS division names aren't consistent, because they weren't consistent. The structure indicates something about the division, these foreign divisions are called "Waffen" divisions "of the SS" rather than "Foost SS Division" because they were made up largely of non-Germans. However, if the consensus is for dropping the "(1st Albanian)" in the article title, that's ok with me. Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 23:46, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • WP:NAME is not WP:OFFICIALNAMES. jnestorius^(talk) 09:06, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Yes, I know that. However, your suggestions are not based on UCN either, and you clearly don't get the nuances. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 09:14, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
• Comment As per common name the article name would be Skanderbeg Division. See also Walloon Legion.--Zoupan 12:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

• what evidence do you have that is the common name? Unsupported conjecture at this stage... Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 13:30, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

It is obviously the short name, and more oftenly used than the official name based on Gbooks and Gscholar. I don't think I'm obliged to present the results, you'll have to take my word, or refute my conclusion. It is commonly recognized as such, and does support Recognizability, Naturalness and Conciseness.--Zoupan 14:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll do neither. If you make a claim, you back it up. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 22:30, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

• Comment: I've produced some data, based on the first one-third of the article sources (or rather the subset I could search on Google Books). I checked the cited pages and/or the index. Perhaps if this table were completed the debate might proceed on the basis of information rather than assertion. jnestorius^(talk) 15:23, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

• Comment - While it is possible that there is a better title for this article than 21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg, there seems to be clear consensus that the parenthetical disambiguator "(1st Albanian)" is inappropriate. We can certainly discuss other title options, but I recommend that we remove the disambiguator in the meantime. Neelix (talk) 20:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
• Comment As I've already said, it is not a disambiguator, it's part of the official name. But go right ahead with removing the (1st Albanian) as that appears to be the consensus. Regards, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 23:13, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

---

Data

Names used in cited sources

Source	Names(s) or descriptions used
Abbott	first: SS-Mountain Division 'Skanderbeg'; next: the 'Skanderbeg' Division
Ailsby	index: 21st SS Gebirgs Division Skanderbeg
Bishop 2007	21st Waffen Gebirgs Division der SS
Cappellano	both the SS volunteer divisions 21st Skandenberg and 22nd Maria Theresia
Cohen	21st SS "Skanderbeg" Division
Dorril	the SS Skanderbeg Division
Elsie	Skanderbeg SS Division
Fischer	p.186: the SS "Skanderbeg" Division; p.224: the Twenty-first SS Division "Skanderbeg"
Fisk	None
Frank	Skanderbeg Waffen SS Mountain Division
Mojzes	Skenderbeg SS Division
Stein	21st Waffen-Gebirgsdivision der SS "Skanderbeg" (alban. Nr. 1)
Tomasevich (2001)	21st SS Volunteer Mountain Division "Skanderbeg"

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304050859/http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/europe/162_serbia_s_sandzak_still_forgotten.pdf to http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/europe/162_serbia_s_sandzak_still_forgotten.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:34, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

New German study on the Skanderbeg

In 2016 Franziska A. Zaugg, Albanische Muslime in der Waffen-SS: Von "Großalbanien" zur Division "Skanderbeg", Paderborn: F. Schöningh was published, a Swiss Ph.D. thesis supervised by Stig Förster that won an award by the Fritz und Helga Exner-Stiftung. I recognize that this article was promoted to be a featured article in 2013. Still it features references to works by Roland Kaltenegger and Otto Kumm. I might refer to an older thread Talk:Artur_Phleps#Roland Kaltenegger and Otto Kumm for some explanation, why this is a problem. Kumm, e.g., is used here to narrate the retreat of the "Skanderbeg" and the "Prinz Eugen" in late 1944. Zaugg characterizes that retreat as "the last wave of violence" in the region and speaks of "war crimes" involving August Schmidhuber and Alfred Graf. The latter was indicted by the Yugoslavian military attorney in 1948. More accessible because it is in English is Xavier Bougarel et al., Muslim SS units in the Balkans and the Soviet Union, in: Jochen Böhler, Robert Gerwarth (eds.), The Waffen-SS. A European History, Oxford: Oxford UP 2017, pp. 252–283. That essay might be useful to provide some much needed context on inter-ethnic tensions and loyalties to explain the particular behavior of the Albanian soldiers.--Assayer (talk) 00:21, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, Assayer. Being such a specific source, Zaugg would be good to have a look at, even with my basic German. Do you have access to a copy? If not, do you know how I might obtain one? I see it was reviewed in Militaergeschichtliche Zeitschrift. Böhler and Gerwarth certainly looks worthy of a look too, but unfortunately Worldcat tell me the nearest library with a copy is 400 miles away. I might be able to find someone who could scan the relevant pages for me via RX, I'll see. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:06, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Update: I managed to get a copy of the relevant chapter of Böhler and Gerwarth via RX, so will endeavour to make some additions to the article based on it in the next little while. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:28, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

I would be willing to scan the relevant chapters for you, but I can get hold of a copy possibly only by the end of August. Meanwhile you might get a preview at google books. There is a review in English at balcania.rs. Ragards, --Assayer (talk) 13:25, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

That would be great, no rush. The Balcanica review seems fine, although I am a bit reticent about a review by a Serb PhD student in a Serbian journal about anything Albanian, so I've requested the German review at RX for completeness. I'll share it when/if I get it. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:00, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

The German review seems pretty positive, although it is clear that Zaugg's work is not an operational history of the division, but more of a political/social one. So, I'd be keen to add what I can on those aspects from anything you can copy for me. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:06, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

I linked to Balcania, because it is in English and open access. If you are interested in some more reviews in German (open access) see Gottfried Niedhart in FAZ, Thomas Casagrande for h-soz-kult, Michael Schmidt-Neke for sehepunkte, Konrad Faber in the right-wing newspaper Junge Freiheit, Klaus Steinke for IFB. You might also be interested in Stefan Petke, Militärische Vergemeinschaftungsversuche muslimischer Soldaten in der Waffen-SS. Die Beispiele der Division "Handschar" und des Osttürkischen Waffenverbands der SS" from the recent volume of the Waffen-SS edited by Wegner, Schulte and Lieb, available on academia.edu.--Assayer (talk) 17:46, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I emailed you the review, per the above. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:51, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

I've now gleaned all the unique information I can from the Muslim SS chapter of Böhler & Gerwarth, and have added a few citations for information already provided by other sources. I look forward to working my way through Zaugg's work if you are able to get your hands on it. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:42, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

SS Division Symbol

The black and white symbol in the infobox is a fictional image that has never been used in any historical context. There is no physical material evidence of the era that shows this symbol. The patch that I replaced it with is authentic and historically accurate. There are countless of image sources that prove this by simply doing a quick google image search of the words SS Skanderbeg Symbol. Kj1595 (talk) 10:45, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

For which you need a reliable source. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:47, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

The original source where the image was obtained from https://militariaplaza.nl/uniform-insignia-20/waffen-ss-skanderberg-volunteer-sleeve-shield-detail Kj1595 (talk) 10:49, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

A militaria website? I don’t think so. Find a reliably published book that shows it and says it was issued to members of the division. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:52, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Can you show me where in the Keegan book the black and white image is found or described? I don't see any link. Where is the proof? Kj1595 (talk) 10:55, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Here is a black and white variation of the patch which is nothing like the vector symbol found in the Infobox https://murphsmilitaria.com/product/21st-ss-mountain-division-skanderbeg-patch Kj1595 (talk) 11:00, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Another militaria website, not a reliable dource. I have the book, the image accurately reflects the symbol in Keegan. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 12:14, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

You have the book? Saying you have the book is not providing a source to back up your claim. I can claim I have the book of a said writer who shows a different image than your book shows. How is your source better than mine in this case? Kj1595 (talk) 14:29, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

An important article such as this should not be misrepresented with fictional images that lack visual sources and historical evidence. This is likely a made up vector image. No visual record of such an image exists in historical textbooks. If a record did exist, we need to see the proof. Saying I have the book in front of me is not providing proof. Kj1595 (talk) 14:38, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Keegan is the source that backs up the logo. I have it. It is therefore verifiable, ie you could gain access to the book and check that I have reflected accurately what it says. I am NOT required to provide you with a scan of the page, however, if you email me, I will respond with a scan of the page. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I should add that, in response to your question "How is your source better than mine in this case?", that John Keegan was a professor of military history who wrote dozens of reliably-published military history books. On the other hand, your sources are a fanboi website and a site that sells militaria, neither of which are going to be remotely considered reliable by Wikipedia. There is absolutely no comparison between my source and yours. Please read the Wikipedia policy on reliable sources. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:41, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

We need to see visual proof or physical links of the Keegan book which explicitly states the image in the infobox was the official symbol used by the 21 SS Division. You have posted that image here without a direct source link to check its accuracy. You can easily upload a scanned page of the book on Dropbox or other hosting sites and link it here so we can see where it states the symbol is the official one. Kj1595 (talk) 14:28, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

You badly need a healthy dose of WP:AGF. I've offered you an opportunity to see it. I am under no obligation to make it available to you, because sources only have to be verifiable, not available to everyone. But I have anyway. Either take up my offer, ask for a scan of the page from WP:RSX, or drop it. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:19, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

The websites aren't reliable. I don't like a general book on the Waffen SS much either. I suggest you try to track down this specialist academic source to settle the question authoritatively. I don't seem to have access to it. Zero^talk 11:00, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

For something as basic as a unit symbol, exceptional sources are not required. This is a storm in a teacup. I will look to get access to the book you linked to though, it will be good to keep the article up to scratch. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:39, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

That "Nazi salute"

To editor Peacemaker67: The "Nazi salute" claim is OR. First, the original caption of the photo in the German Federal Archive says only "mit erhobenem Arm ab" (with his arm raised). Does the German Federal Archive not know what a Nazi salute looks like? Second, the given source (Fisk), besides being of dubious reliability, doesn't have the photo at all. The text mentions a photo with a Nazi salute, but we are not entitled to assume that the reference is to this particular photo rather than a different one. Third, just because Hitler was allowed to Heil Himself in sloppy fashion doesn't mean that anyone else was. The truth might well be that al-Husseini intended to give a Nazi salute but at the moment this is an unsourced claim disguised as a cheap shot. I can't help thinking of the famous photo of Netanyahu that Haaretz republished several weeks ago; see here. Zero^talk 10:19, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

How is Fisk unreliable, exactly? Suggest you take that to RSN and see how you go. The Israeli thing is OSE. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:36, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Please read again why using Fisk is OR. Zero^talk 12:37, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Here is the exact Fisk's quote from: Robert Fisk (18 December 2007). The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. p. 459. ISBN 978-0-307-42871-4.

Haj Amin, right hand raised in the Nazi salute, inspecting newly recruited Bosnian Muslims who had joind the Wehrmacht.

Any doubt Fisk is talking about greeting this specific SS unit?

Another source: Moshe Pearlman (1947). Mufti of Jerusalem; the Story of Haj Amin El Husseini. V Gollancz. p. 6.:

The Mufti, giving Nazi salute, reviewing Moslem SS troops, the picture is reproduced from the Berliner Illustrierte Zeitung

And another source: Antonio J. Muñoz (2001). The East Came West: Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist Volunteers in the German Armed Forces, 1941-1945. Axis Europa Books. p. 256. ISBN 978-1-891227-39-4.

The Mufti of Jerusalem gives the Nazi salute, as company of Bosnian Muslim SS men pass in review . U . S . National Archives and Bundesarchiv

To sum things up, this is a famous picture, enjoys significant source coverage. Infinity Knight (talk) 15:14, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Munoz isn’t a reliable source, and appears to be talk about troops marching past the Mufti, rather than what is happening here. what we need is a source showing this photo and saying it is a Nazi salute. I don’t have Fisk or Pearlman to hand, is it the same photo in either or both books? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:21, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Fisk does not have the photo. In fact there are no photos at all in his book of 1366 pages. Pearlman has a photo but not the same one. In Pearlman's photo, which shows him walking in the other direction, the mufti's arm appears bent at a right angle, nothing like a Nazi salute. In any case, Maurice Pearlman was a professional propagandist who published his book with the help of the Jewish Agency and in the following year became the first IDF spokesperson. Unreliable source! I can only see a snippet of Muñoz without the image, but the caption (which says "as company after company of Bosnian Muslim SS men pass in review") does not match either our photo or Pearlman's photo as they both show the soldiers stationary with the mufti walking along the rank (the standard "inspecting the troops" image). So either Muñoz has a different image, or has a nonsense caption. Zero^talk 04:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Anyway, I really don't understand what the fuss is about here. The guy was greeting a Waffen-SS division; isn't that enough? It's obvious that only a personal admission or an eye-witness account could factually establish whether he was raising his arm in a general greeting sort of way or intentionally giving a Nazi salute. Otherwise, it is an opinion. So even if we find this photo with "Nazi salute" in the caption it would demand attribution of the opinion to whoever's opinion it is. And that would look silly. Zero^talk 04:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I didn't look at Pearlman's book carefully enough. There are two relevant photos in that book. One says "reviewing Bosnian troops of the Waffen SS" which I described above — it shows a row of soldiers dressed as in our photo, but he is walking in the other direction and his arm away from the soldiers is raised in a right angle. The other has caption "The Mufti, giving the Nazi salute, reviewing Moslem SS troops" — it shows two rows of soldiers who are wearing German helmets and the mufti is walking between them. I have three other photos of the mufti raising his arm in similar fashion. Two are posed group photos taken in Italy where he is waving towards the camera. The other is the clearest photo I know of him "inspecting" Waffen-SS troops — this time his arm is almost straight but his palm is facing towards his left (like a Karate chop) and there is no caption. Zero^talk 06:24, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

The image should be substituted with Stahlhelm one then to avoid OR of Sieg Heil. The image license would allow it. According to high quality source George H. Stein (1984). The Waffen SS: Hitler's Elite Guard at War, 1939-1945. Cornell University Press. p. 56. ISBN 0-8014-9275-0., SS personal under Army command were required to salute... and Waffen SS, its members were granted permission to use the Nazi salute... The source also discusses the integration of imams into the army on page 182. Infinity Knight (talk) 20:37, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Pearlman's book is not a reliable source, al Husseini was not a Waffen SS member, and I'm surprised at your SYNTH. Zero^talk 01:27, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

That may be right, but you only have to look at Category:Amin al-Husseini in 1943 to see multiple examples of him doing this salute. Your contention that only Hitler did sloppy Nazi salutes is obviously wrong, see File:1940 Himmler Donostian.jpg and File:Heinrich Himmler pasando revista a las tropas (3 de 4) - Fondo Car-Kutxa Fototeka.jpg (Himmler) and others File:Accueil par la Hitlerjugend Flandern à Bruxelles d'une délégation de la Hitlerjugend allemande.jpg, BertusSmit.jpg and File: Bundesarchiv Bild 101I-721-0352-36A, France, meeting of German officers.jpg. These sorts of sloppy Hitler salutes were common, and clearly al-Husseini is doing one in all of these Bundesarchiv photos of him with members of the Handschar division. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

To editor Infinity Knight: You did a revert with "rv, see talk" but I can't find anything here that justifies it. Where is it? Surely you don't mean your assertion that SS members were allowed to use the Nazi salute and therefore (by what logic?) the mufti who was not an SS member must have been using it. He wasn't an imam integrated into the army either, so I don't know why you brought that up. Zero^talk 02:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I've had a look at the Fisk book, and it doesn't contain any photographs at all. What it says on p. 358 is "There are other pictures of the time: of Haj Amin at Nazi rallies in Berlin, Haj Amin greeted by Heinrich Himmler, Haj Amin, right arm raised in the Nazi salute, inspecting newly recruited Bosnian Muslims who had joined the Wehrmacht." The answer to this is to use the text about him doing the "Nazi salute" while inspecting the Bosnian recruits in the body of the article (cited to Fisk), not in the caption of the photograph, as we do not know which photograph Fisk is referring to. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:33, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

The image of the troops marching past the Mufti, referred by Munoz source above. Scroll a bit down, Grand Mufti Saluting Nazi Muslim Troops in Parade.

The image of The Mufti, Giving the Nazi Salute, Reviewing Moslem SS Troops. referred by Pearlman above, a.k.a. the Stahlhelm image.

Per George H. Stein (1984). The Waffen SS: Hitler's Elite Guard at War, 1939-1945. Cornell University Press. p. 182. ISBN 0-8014-9275-0. Despite their elaborate uniforms and spiritual ministrations of the pro-Nazi Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin El Hussein..., reflects on mufti's role in this army unit. More info in page 182.

Infinity Knight (talk) 17:43, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

As has been made clear above, Munoz isn't reliably published (Axis Europa), and Pearlman is dubious. The contents of Stein are already reflected in the article. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:00, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Is Jerusalem Post considered a reliable source? Their caption for the image used in this article (Bundesarchiv, Bild 146-1980-036-05) Husseini giving the Heil Hitler salute to Bosnian Muslim volunteers to the notorious Waffen SS (the Hanzar SS Division) in November, 1943.... Infinity Knight (talk) 06:07, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Well, generally yes, but in matters relating to Haj Amin I reckon it is questionable due to possible bias. Context matters. They are also claiming the photo is from their archives, when it clearly is a Bundesarchiv pic. I'd be happy with it supporting a better source, but not on its own. What is wrong with just saying it in the body, cited to Fisk and just describing him as "reviewing" in the caption? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:18, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I am not an expert on Sieg Heil, initially I believed there is a single image of this "review". The mufti had a significant role, he was on Nazi payroll recruiting and spiritually guiding this unit, guess this explains the abundance of the images of the mufti with the unit preserved. Generally, he was not shy about saluting. Experts in the field, like Dr. Joel Fishman, a fellow of the Jerusalem Center, is a historian and former editor of the Jewish Political Studies Review describe this specific (Bundesarchiv, Bild 146-1980-036-05) image: November 1943 Amin al-Husseini greeting Bosnian Waffen-SS volunteers with a Nazi salute. Why should we use euphemisms? Infinity Knight (talk) 07:03, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting any euphemisms. He is reviewing the troops, that is obvious to anyone who knows anything about the military. The divisional commander and other officers following him confirms he is reviewing the troops. He also has his arm raised, which may or may not be a Nazi salute, and the only semi-reliable sources we have for that description are pretty right-wing Israeli ones. And he was a Palestinian leader. Surely I don't need to draw the lines between the dots here? The JCPA is a neo-conservative think tank, and again, I think context matters. What worries me is I have a copy of Lepre, and despite him using images of Haj Amin, he doesn't say he is doing the Nazi salute. What we have is a textual description by Fisk, but it is not connected to a specific photograph. Without using the Israeli sources, we can include the fact that Haj Amin used a Nazi salute in the body of the article, without saying this photograph shows it. I don't see why we wouldn't just do that. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:27, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Peacemaker67, your point about sloppy salutes is correct and I withdraw that, but still it is worth comparing the proper salute he gave to Hitler on IK's youtube clip to the bent arm here. I checked Lepre too. In addition, I checked the Nation Associates dossier "The Arab Higher Committee" that is the main path by which most of this material got publicised and found (to my surprise, I must admit, since it was funded by the Jewish Agency) that they don't call it a Nazi salute either. I find the suggestion that we cite Sarah Honig's Arab-baiting rant in JP to be insulting, and you are correct about JCPA. We must not use advocacy organisations as sources of fact about their sworn enemies; that is elementary wikicraft. In the interest of ending this discussion, I agree to your proposal. Zero^talk 11:17, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good, glad that you guys found this compromise. Infinity Knight (talk) 15:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

OK done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:42, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

RV

@Peacemaker67 Yeoman says "in gratitude for Nazi "after Italy's capitulation, German forces invaded Albania (...)in gratitude to the Nazis for "liberation" from Slav rule, the Kosovars proposed that Albanians were "Aryans of Illyrian heritage" " this happened after Italian rule and should be placed in the background segment where it talks about the German occupation of Kosovo. I changed Skanderbeg from "George" to Gjergj because on his Wikipedia page, it says "Gjergj Kastrioti" in the lead. I can't find anything about "George Kastrioti" in Yeomans book. Durraz0 (talk) 23:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Operation Rübezahl

This article is an FA. That doesn't mean it is perfect, but changes need to be done carefully and using reliable sources. If you have changes, make sure you closely cite them using reliable sources. I have added Operation Rübezahl on the basis of a recent reliable source that mentions the involvement of the division in the first phase of the operation, which it states was called Operation Draufganger. If you have contrasting information from a reliable source regarding the two operations being completely separate, on Wikipedia we compare and contrast such information with information from other reliable sources, we don't decide for ourselves which reliable source is correct and change the article to suit. If you think I am wrong about the unreliability of thule-italia.com, read WP:RS and get a community opinion at WP:RSN. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:08, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

The patch in the infobox, again

This link [8] shows the front cover of the book from which this image is supposed to be sourced. It clearly does not show the patch. It is also claimed that this source [9] also supports the image, but it is clearly not reliable. The image file also isn't properly licensed and cannot be used on an FA until it is. Fix up the licensing on the image file page, then bring it back. Edit-warring this image into the article will be reported as disruptive behaviour. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:48, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

• PrincLeka1914: File:21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg.svg IS NOT properly licensed. You may have created the file, but what did you use to create it? What was the source you used to guide your creation of this file. Without that information (and the source being reliable), it cannot be used. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:11, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

• Kj1595: SS Skanderbeg volunteer sleeve patch.png is not reliably sourced, as explained at the top. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:12, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

I think the one from Keegan should be reinstated until one or both of these images is properly licensed, because at least it is from a reliable source and is properly licensed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:11, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

On second thoughts, I've removed the image for now. Once we have one or more with acceptable licensing, we can decide what goes there. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:25, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Whomever is inserting the unsourced badge, stop it, read the above and discuss here. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:32, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Pinging @OhioGopnik: Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:51, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Peacemaker67 I'm sorry are you complaining because the page is lacking a visual for the reader and I went ahead and took a photo with a cellphone. Uploaded to commons for public use. I then didn't know if it was reserved to I contributed and added two emblems as alternative emblems, just in case. But the Peacekeeper has to make things perfect to things that don't concern him at all and make things worst. Then, watch it get taken down because it's inconvenient? I'm sorry who are you? If this is a problem then find another platform, because anyone is allowed to add or edit words, references, images, and other media here. What is contributed is more important than who contributes it. Oh, I took that photo with my phone 5 minutes prior to uploading it then just added a quick file name thus posted on this article. I allowed my photo to be used for public use, was licensed to me? It said that on commons if you slowed down. But I apologize I wanted to upload photos for readers and neglected filling out anything more than the required field. But you should post on the article that everything must be in compliance with your standards and not Wikipedia's because you're the first person to have a problem with it. "Edit-warring this image into the article will be reported as disruptive behaviour." I'm sorry you cannot do that. You do not have any or enough evidence to fabricate a claim and falsely report something, due to your own ignorance and someone contributing other than you. You're not utilizing your resources properly, threatening with a wrongful report and an exploit to the report system. Suspicion alone with your ignorance does not give you the right to make false reports. This is Wikipedia, where everyone is allowed to contribute. So you have no jurisdiction to moderate any page on Wikipedia and fabricate a false claim because it wasn't you. So how ironic your name is peacemaker and you're abusing a report button due to your own ignorance and violating, what Wikipedia was built on. But I can see you served in the United Nations you've been indoctrinated into thinking you're always above the law and enforcing rules out of your legal and respected jurisdiction. Referring me to this talk box and seeing your past in regards to questioning people and I'm assuming my intelligence in personal content and trying to ask But I can understand you're very OCD with this page, being so authentic. So I'll just delete the photo from the commons because I posted the emblem at the bottom of the infobox as well as an alternative photo to give a reader at least a visual until you could find your rare photo with copyright approval. But I'll just forget I stumbled across this article, I don't want to contribute to a toxic community that worries about something so absurd, and being so aggressive to write this out for a page dedicated to a bunch of racist obsolete Albanian's, is too concerning. Like what do you want me to cite my own photograph I took 5 minutes before uploading and put in the description. "papa anton was a partisan who did not like invaders. He had a weird habit of collecting items off the dead soldiers he slayed. After the years passed it is now in my possession." I'll for now on always put that as the description and I'll ping you to show you every time.

Ktrimi991 Thanks for the ping made me laugh the guy who partook in illegally bombing my country, and now is violating rules outside his jurisdiction still 30 years laterOhioGopnik (talk) 09:25, 22 January 2022 (UTC)}}

Just read WP:TAG. When you have an image that has licensing that actually passes muster for inclusion in an FA, come back, happy to discuss. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:40, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Adding image

Hello and Happy New Year Anyone hanging around who would know if this would be acceptable to add to the infobox, or is this preferred? Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 12:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Neither. The first is dubious because there are many fake and inaccurate reproductions of shoulder patches and nothing in the source explains the bona fides of the one depicted in the book, and the second is disputed. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 17:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

@Peacemaker67: thanks. Just coming across 21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg (Q66778370) Cheers. Lotje (talk) 06:45, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

See also Commons:Category:SS Skanderbeg Lotje (talk) 09:54, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

This has been the subject of discussion for some time. None of those images of a shoulder patch for this division are verified. Given this is an FA, none of them can be used until we have a reliable source for a patch. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:19, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

@Peacemaker67: have you asked Commons:User:Bundesarchiv-B6? Lotje (talk) 10:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

No. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 13:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

@Peacemaker67: I could put a request forward, if you wish. Lotje (talk) 17:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Sure, but any image of a shoulder patch needs to clearly state the provenance of the photographed patch itself (where it was obtained from and who made the patch, to show it is an original and not something someone dreamed up) as well as who took the photograph of the patch. Presumably someone within the Waffen-SS logistics chain designed the original patch and and it was manufactured by a German enterprise under contract to the Waffen-SS. If the provenance of the actual patch can be shown, and who took the image, then it can be examined against German copyright law to determine if it is now public domain. I would then ask someone knowledgeable on copyright matters, such as Nikkimaria, about whether the image can be used. If I have that wrong, or different or additional information is needed, Nikkimaria please advise. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 18:54, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

If the patch is three-dimensional, your understanding is correct - whether it is or is not three-dimensional would likely depend on the design of the specific patch. If two-dimensional we need not care about the photographer. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Nikkimaria! So, Lotje, we need a reliable source for the patch. What we have on all of those files pages doesn't meet that standard. Once we have an image of a verifiable patch, we can look at licensing and see if it can be used. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@Peacemaker67: @Nikkimaria: surely someone browsed through the site Cheers. Lotje (talk) 05:24, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

No. Have you? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes I did, That is why it helped me categorizie this file. Lotje (talk) 06:20, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Did you find an image file that meets the above requirements? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@Peacemaker67: no I did not, hence my question to User:Bundesarchiv-B6. Lotje (talk) 11:24, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

You might wish to contact Benutzer:Bundesarchiv-B6 or www.bild.bundesarchiv.de Lotje (talk) 11:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

I am not advocating adding an image. I'd be happy to leave it as is, as it is the source of fitful edit-warring in any case. If someone else finds one with an acceptable source and licensing, I certainly wouldn't oppose its inclusion. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Fine by me. No problem. Lotje (talk) 05:02, 5 January 2023 (UTC)