Talk:Civilian life under the German occupation of the Channel Islands

Insulin supplies

I've seen it claimed here that the Nazis deliberately withheld the insulin supplies they received from the Red Cross and which were intended for the islanders with diabetes. If that is true (and I've seen no corroborating evidence), those 30 civilian deaths weren't accidental;

https://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/118878130 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meltingpot (talk • contribs) 19:25, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Civilian life under the German occupation of the Channel Islands and Living with the enemy in the German-occupied Channel Islands are redundant articles, or arguably a content fork which is specifically The title "Living with the enemy in the German-occupied Channel Islands" is wholly inappropriate for Wikipedia, and multiple editors have pointed this out over the years, yet we somehow. It's clear there should only be one article, it should not be titled "Living with the enemy in the German-occupied Channel Islands", and this article, "Civilian life under the German occupation of the Channel Islands", is the ideal place for it since that title describes what the article covers. Skimming the articles, this looks like it could be a complex task because the articles are so long. Help is welcome. This discussion is a chance for contributors to weigh in on the process or to dispute the merger rationale. MartinPoulter (talk) 12:08, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree, and I am one of those who objected to the title "Living with the Enemy etc. as non-neutral, but it will be a major task to merge the two articles.Smallchief (talk) 15:20, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Disagree, the articles were designed to provide (1) the problems of being a civilian living under occupation which is totally separate to (2) the problems of each nationality, living with their enemies, not just the islanders with the German troops, but Germans with an enemy local population, UK people being treated differently to local Islanders, showing how the Germans had to keep their Granville raid secret for example, conflicts between the islanders and their own governments, plus criminals dealing with two police forces, the Island police forces having conflicts between their orders and dealing with situations and imported labour both German and other nationalities and the problems they had. i.e. (2) is all about the conflicts of the various groups. In war people have enemies, each group had their enemies and they had to live with them. This article is not about one particular enemy, it is about every group's enemies. I could not fit the problems of the different nationalities into the civilian life article or even scatter the information across the whole series of articles I wrote and anyway I found the conflicts between the nationalities an interesting subject in itself. Try and come up with an alternative to enemy, I tried 4 years ago and failed.Ânes-pur-sàng (talk) 08:15, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

With respect, I'm not sure those topics are really as distinct as Ânes-pur-sàng imagines. While separate scholarly monographs could probably be written on each, Wikipedia is not the right forum for such granular treatment. As it currently stands, the excessive subdivision of this topic creates a barrier to entry for readers who wish to find a one-stop overview of the subject, i.e. the majority of Wikipedia users. Grifter84 - Доверяй, но проверяй 11:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

A possible alternative to merging would be move of Living with the enemy in the German-occupied Channel Islands to Inter-community conflict in the German-occupied Channel Islands to address NPOV and based on Ânes-pur-sàng's comment. buidhe 08:28, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

The merge idea sounds good 2607:9880:1A38:7F:B543:37F5:66EE:2BA4 (talk) 19:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

• @MartinPoulter: There is clear consensus to merge, which I support as well. I've moved it for now to get rid of the POV title but you should feel free to go ahead. buidhe 09:05, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

The current content definitely doesn't match the title. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:12, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Agree, the title that has been chosen does not match the content. There was no need to change this title, "Civilian life under the German occupation of the Channel Islands". If you don't like the word German drop it and make it "Civilian life under occupation in the Channel Islands". This article is designed to explain the difficulties of living, day to day, under occupation, such as food and clothing shortages, nothing to do with conflicts with the occupying forces. It was "Civilian life". Ânes-pur-sàng (talk) 08:30, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Strongly disagree with merging as it will confuse this article explaining the problems experienced by 90% of the population in day to day living as a civilian with the other article which was designed to explain the conflicts between the various groups, a few of the civilians, germans, imported workers and Russian troops with each other and between the two governments, local and German, which is a totally different subject. "Living with the enemy in the German-occupied Channel Islands" is the title of the other article, if you don't like the name how about changing it to "Conflicts under occupation in the Channel Islands" Ânes-pur-sàng (talk) 08:40, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

I strongly agree with the merger proposal. Respectfully, I believe this broad topic of German occupation of the Channel Islands has been subdivided far too finely for Wikipedia's standards, and that the content currently covered by separate articles could easily be organized as sub-headings to a single, comprehensive article. Such a merger would not confuse two completely separate topics. On the contrary, what is confusing is the current state of affairs in which topics that are intuitively related get treated in separate articles with cumbersome titles. Grifter84 - Доверяй, но проверяй 11:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

I think some kind of merger is highly desirable here. The term "inter-community conflict" also sounds rather absurd in this context. I'd advocate merging into a new Daily life in the German-occupied Channel Islands while some content could be folded into Resistance in the German-occupied Channel Islands which currently takes an extremely narrow view of the topic. —Brigade Piron (talk) 10:59, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Too much detail

While certain editors have contributed yeoman's work to this series of articles on the Channel Islands during World War II, I'm concerned that the exhaustive level of detail they delve into has become a problem. Much of what is included here, while of interest to amateur historians, goes beyond what the general reader will find notable and leads to excessive length. For comparison, the entire article on German military administration in occupied France during World War II, an undeniably more strategically significant event that affected a population orders of magnitude larger than that of the Channel Islands, takes up less space than this very narrow subject, with no sacrifice in quality. Indeed, this article's subheading devoted exclusively to food is longer than the entire discussion of civilian life in German-occupied France. I realize I am proposing extensive cutting of what is undeniably a tremendous amount of research and labor that have gone into this project. Nevertheless, I am convinced that some radical trimming will make this a better, more accessible article for the majority of Wikipedia readers. Grifter84 - Доверяй, но проверяй 11:48, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

You are using your time to advocate for the deletion of valuable and sourced historical information. Why don't you spend that time to add information to other pages about the German occupation to even out this imbalance? If you are into deletionism though, I would suggest to start by pages with actually no value to mankind such as meaningless scores from antiquated local competitions or pets of politicians that were cute on social medias. CodemWiki (talk) 12:21, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Two Instruction Papers

Is it really necessary to have the same image twice on this page? Benjamin Silversten (talk) 16:45, 13 April 2022 (UTC)