Talk:Alfred von Schlieffen

Logic?

Two obvious errors in this article:

a) Moltke altered the plan in fact to some great extent by a substantial weakening of forces to be deployed against France.

b) since Moltke altered it substantially it should not be called Schlieffen's Plan anymore as in fact it was not his but Moltke's. So, the Schlieffen Plan was never implemented and therefore could not have failed in 1914 (as it most probably would not have failed) ... LOGIC ! heheh Moltke simply was a lesser strategist. That's all...

Untitled

Strengthen the right wing........ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 214.13.130.104 (talk) 08:16, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Alfred Von Schlieffen Critique

This article is a great start to what could be a longer article. The article has good content however it could use more information. There is a lot of information that is missing that could be added. In the Biography, it skips over big gaps in his life. They're not major issues but there could be more about Alfred Von Schlieffen's life, about him growing up. I also think that much of the information in the Biography section could be moved into it's own section about military. There were a couple facts about the amount of time he spent in the Prussian army and in the Austro-Prussian War. There could also be a lot more information about his role in the military which would help with creating this new section. The article could use some work in regards to content but so far I believe it's a great start and has all the basic information about Alfred Von Schlieffen.--Nsteblin (talk) 04:06, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

You are correct. This is a solid start-class article. There are several references listed in the article which indicates further information could be integrated into the article to make it more comprehensive. maclean (talk) 05:55, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Good article choice, Schlieffen is a very interesting historical character. I have a few suggestions for improvement of your article. How old was he when he was admitted to the general war school? You mentioned that he was young but were not specific. I would like to know what his duties were as a part of the ‘great general staff’ I am not familiar with German military command and I am assuming most readers of your article are not either. I am curious about his career, I would like to read more specific examples of what strategies Schlieffen used in other battles and who influenced him in the creation of his strategies. A couple of suggestions as to the lay out of your page; if you split up his military achievements from his bio the information would be easier to digest, and if you added a visual or even a link to a visual of the Schlieffen plan it would enrich your content. A few things I really enjoyed from your article were talking and his legacy and who he influenced, and I thought that adding quotations was excellent and really gave zazz to your article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnrdc (talk • contribs) 00:56, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

In response to this article, I have a few points that I would like to identify to the author in an attempt to further improve the article. First off, I would like to point out that your referencing is very good, especially in the biography section. This is a very well done section as well. I found this article to be very informative, even though I knew a bit about von Schlieffen before reading this article. I found the part on the Schlieffen plan to be very interesting. The only part I would like fruther clarification on is the quote about the Schlieffen plan using Blitzkreig to deafeat the French in WWI. I was unable to find the source which used that quote as a reference, and I only ever heard Blitzkreig in reference to the time just before, and during, WWII. I had a few suggestions in order to improve the article. First off, the article could be improved by being less colloquial (conversationalist). To that extent, a reduction in the use of the word 'soon' and phrases such as 'he found time' could make the article sound more formal. Further, if it is possible, for someone (maybe by another user in another edit) to include some of the battles that von Schlieffen was involved in. That, along with the reasons why he advanced so quickly in the German military or the tactics he used in his battles could expand on the comment from Ludendorf about von Schlieffen being the best soldier of his generation. Overall, this is an neutral article which is written well and is a good start for further expansion of a historical figure who should be more recognized.SemperInvictus (talk) 03:40, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

To get this article up to B class, there are two aspects that require improvement:

1. The first problem is the grammar, which somehow sounds like the article was auto-translated from German. Someone needs to go over it and clean up the prose. This would take the article to C class.
2. The second problem is the referencing. Every paragraph requires a reference, and every quote requires a reference. There are good sources on the subject, so it should be possible to take the article all the way to featured, but realistically, that would require a lot of work at this point. The article would then recieve a B rating is the referencing were complete.

Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Need a map with captions in English

Having a map of the invasion plan with captions in Vietnamese (or whatever that is) in the English Wiki isn't particularly useful. Is this what brain-damaged U.S. "IP" policy has brought us to? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.187.52.255 (talk) 08:14, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Formatting Issues

There was a number of minor formatting issues that I addressed, I'll be documenting all other changes I make to the page here. Carobu (talk) 17:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Influence

This whole section reads as an opinion piece, and is poorly cited. I'm considering removing it simply because it doesn't deal in the realm of fact, but opinion. It really looks like someone wrote a paper on him and then copy and pasted it into here. If no one can add citations to this I'm going to chop it out in a week. I'll do some digging of my own to citations to back up said statements. But that still doesn't change the underlying issue that most of it seems to delve into opinion. Anyone have any thoughts on this? Carobu (talk) 21:13, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alfred von Schlieffen. 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/20070311025853/http://cgsc.leavenworth.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/Cannae/cannae.asp to http://cgsc.leavenworth.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/Cannae/cannae.asp

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) 12:42, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Graf as title?

As stated in the note, should his name be "Graf Alfred von Schlieffen" rather than "Alfred Graf von Schlieffen"? Karl Bildungshunger1965 (talk) 01:16, 8 January 2021 (UTC)