Talk:Volkswagen Beetle

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Volkswagen Beetle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100304155753/http://www2.journalnow.com:80/content/2010/mar/02/the-bug-doctor-former-dealership-mechanic-opened-a/news-regional/ to http://www2.journalnow.com/content/2010/mar/02/the-bug-doctor-former-dealership-mechanic-opened-a/news-regional/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130526224417/http://www.volkswagen-classic.de/modelle/kaefer-1200-limousine-1954-1965 to http://www.volkswagen-classic.de/modelle/kaefer-1200-limousine-1954-1965

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Also Called

The Also Called section in the infobox is getting too lengthy. The purpose of this section is for other names of the vehicle. Since this is an English Wiki page, it seems incorrect to list the name of the vehicle in other languages as it would have been sold in other non-English speaking markets. The See Also section of the page lists a link to other names: List of names for Type 1

Can we agree that the Also Called section of the infobox should be limited to other names in English speaking markets i.e. Bug, Super Beetle, etc? Expandinglight5 (talk) 20:19, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Start of production

In the introduction the Production is clamed from 1938 on, but the text clearly sais, that the Production startet not before 1941 in a small scale, and mass production after the war. In 1938 only a few preseries Vehicles where completed. Since when the preseries marks the beginning of the production?--WerWil (talk) 10:35, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Volkswagen Beetle. 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/20160310065902/http://tribune.ie/archive/article/2003/sep/14/motor-moguls-facing-end-of-an-era to http://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2003/sep/14/motor-moguls-facing-end-of-an-era/

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) 15:01, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Article incorrect: Name "Beetle" did not exist

The real and official name of this car was and is "Volkswagen Käfer" (various types), the name "beetle" in relation to this car was unknown.

The type "beetle" is only correct in relation to the type 5C and afterwards "new beetle" to type 9C.

The whole article is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810B:C540:204:7D0D:C8FD:4C4:A0C5 (talk) 14:39, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

You'll notice the page does not say "Beetle" was an official name. It wasn't. Nor was Käfer. The factory called them Typ 1. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 19:42, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Volkswagen Beetle. 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/20110710140428/http://dkarros.com/es/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=522%3A1973-volkswagen-super-escarabajo-&catid=14%3A1970&Itemid=15 to http://dkarros.com/es/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=522%3A1973-volkswagen-super-escarabajo-&catid=14%3A1970&Itemid=15
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080306113930/http://www.lasteditionbeetle.com/history.php to http://www.lasteditionbeetle.com/history.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120119040355/http://books.hindustantimes.com/2012/01/hitler-stole-beetle-design-from-a-jew/ to http://books.hindustantimes.com/2012/01/hitler-stole-beetle-design-from-a-jew/

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) 05:05, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

In popular culture

A while ago someone removed the "in popular culture" section. Can we really have this article without mentioning "Herbie? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:35, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing: Well popular culture/cultural influence section should definitely be part of this article.--Kmhkmh (talk) 07:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

As long as it meets the WP:IPC guidelines. - BilCat (talk) 08:33, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Note the policy nowhere suggests a wholesale removal if some problematic content has accumulated, but talks of trimming and selected removal. I've added the deleted part below for reference purposes. Although it certainly has sourcing issues, most of it seems correct and principally verifiable and at least some of it is definitely proper encyclopedic content (as in WP:IPC compliant content), in particular mentioning Herbie, the missing of which was complained about at the beginning of this thread. Now, whether it is worth salvaging and sourcing parts from the old section or simply writing a new one, that's up to the editors taking on the task. In any case imho Herbie and de:Dudu (a separate German movie series) and possibly no:Pelle Politibil (Norwegian series about a police beetle) should be mentioned in such a section.--Kmhkmh (talk) 00:11, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I'd agree with Kmhkmh on this one, & I'm usually inclined to delete these kinds of sections as junk. If the content is as contained below, IMO it meets the test for cultural impact. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 05:04, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

deleted section

Like its contemporaries, the Mini, the Citroën 2CV, the Renault 4, and the Fiat 500, the Type 1 has long outlasted predictions of its lifespan. It has been regarded as something of a "cult" car since its 1960s association with the hippie movement and surf culture; and the obvious attributes of its unique and quirky design along with its low price. (For example, the Beetle could float on water thanks to its sealed floor pans and overall tight construction, as shown in the 1972 Volkswagen commercial.

The Beetle offered a wide variety of appeals to various sub-markets. Its mechanical simplicity and accessibility appealed to do-it-yourself mechanics. For customizers and modifiers, the ubiquity of the Beetle meant that a large variety of aftermarket performance equipment was available and the platform was used for off-road modifications such as Baja bugs and fiberglass-bodied dune buggies. For others, driving a Type I or Type II was as much a virtue-signalling social statement as it was a means of transportation. The Volkswagen came to symbolize some owners' desire to distinguish themselves from the decadence, conspicuous consumption, and addiction to comfort symbolized by full-sized American cars. Their fuel economy symbolized environmental friendliness, although the Volkswagen motor was highly polluting. Hippies often did aesthetic customizations to their Type Is and IIs and psychedelically painted ones were early examples of art cars. Currently, there are a wide array of clubs focused on the Beetle. Looks include the Cal-Style VW resto-look, Cal Look, German-look, resto-Cal Look, buggies, Baja Bugs, old school, Disney's Herbie the Love Bug replicas, ratlook, etc. Part of the Type 1's cult status is attributed to it being one of a few cars with an air-cooled horizontally opposed engine, and the consequent ease of repair and modification, as opposed to more complex water-cooled engines. The original flat four had fewer than 200 moving parts.

The Type 1 has made numerous appearances in Hollywood films, most notably in Disney's Herbie series. In Cars, every bug or insect is represented by a Type 1. The Beetle is also seen in the background of the Beatles album cover for Abbey Road. In the 1980s Transformers cartoon, one of the most popular characters Bumblebee transformed into a VW Beetle, as did the evil Bugbite in the rival GoBots animated series and toyline.

In 2016, Lego created a model of the Volkswagen Beetle as part of their Lego Creator Series. The Lego model has 1,170 pieces. The Beetle is reflective of the 1960s California surfing culture.

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Volkswagen Beetle. 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/20140819083815/http://www.aftenposten.no/webtv/Dragrace-i-folkevogn-7671021.html to http://www.aftenposten.no/webtv/Dragrace-i-folkevogn-7671021.html

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) 02:41, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Crediting Hitler for stolen idea of car design

There should at least be some mention of the fact that Adolf Hitler had stolen the idea of the VW Beetle from not only a Jewish engineer, but also well as other Czech auto designers at the time. It is inappropriate to credit Hitler with something he never actually designed and there is heavy proof against it. Nazi Propaganda claimed he developed the car. Everyone knows this is false. Please someone support me in giving at least a notable mention, not the "disputed" mention to the fact that Hitler did not invent the car. The idea was stolen by engineers who were persecuted by the Nazis and driven out of the country Ganz himself was arrested by the Gestapo because they wanted to erase any trace of his work or responsibility for the original design. Can anyone please support me in changing the statement that: "the Volkswagen was mainly the brainchild of Ferdinand Porsche and Adolf Hitler" At least a mention that the idea was stolen should be stated in the article. Can anyone concur with me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rick4512 (talk • contribs) 23:35, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

If Ganz's role can be documented in good solid sources, I'm all for including it. We should avoid emotive language like "stolen" and "persecuted"; just give the verifiable facts. Also, we should not draw conclusions, such as "was arrested by the Gestapo because they wanted to erase any trace of his work", unless the conclusion is very well-attested. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 23:45, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm a bit concerned by the proposition Hitler stole the design. He inspired (or financed) the project, but its actual design was by Porsche. Did Porsche "borrow", or appropriate, or outright steal? Maybe--but copying by designers,then & now, is not exactly uncommon... TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 04:58, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Why would they remove it?

Hello, I a little bit confused of why would they removed the Golf platform-based Beetle on the sucessor section of the infobox? I need some answers ASAP. Thank you! VictorTorres2002 (talk) 01:26, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

For me, it's simple. The first-generation Golf filled the Type 1's market niche. By the time we get to the New Beetle, the market has completely changed. Calling it "design successor" or "style successor" is something done for no other page. Is the '-02 T-bird to be listed as the "style successor" of the '57? is the F-type to be listed as "style successor" to the E-type? And who's going to decide? AFAIK, no source has actually called the New Beetle "style successor" to anything, even if the styling is pretty clearly inspired. (Frankly, the later A5 Beetle is actually closer in styling, so...) TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 06:22, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

I changed "design" to "style" only because it is at least styled after the Beetle - it could hardly be further away in design. I agree that either term is daft - I don't see how a model introduced in Europe so much later can be any kind of successor. Ian Dalziel (talk) 12:26, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• KDF-wagen tinplate toy.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:52, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Five-seater?

On 27 January 2019‎ 2601:246:d00:85c:2cc1:805a:b8de:fdb5 edited:

(Fixed the stated seating capacity. It claimed it was intended for five people, however, it was not. The Volkswagen Beetle came with 4 seatbelts and a sticker outlining that 4 occupants at maximum should ride in the car.)

I reverted this, based on the existing attached reference:

(Undid. Cited brochure says: "The back seat has ample room for three...")

Now I see that 147.126.10.152 has just reverted my edit of 27 January.

I'm walking away from this, but if anyone cares, it's clearly WP policy to use reliable refs rather than an anonymous IP's recollection of how many seatbelts, and the alleged fact that "there was a sticker..." -Snori (talk) 00:26, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Reverted. We can seek page protection if unsourced changes by multiple IPs continue this. - BilCat (talk) 01:16, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

• There are three seats. Not four, not five. The rear seat is a bench. It was part of the original Hitler-period spec that the car could hold a "typical German family" and that was considered to have three children.(Ludvigsen, Professor Porsche's Wars, p 133) So the seat is wide enough for three children, even if not for three adults. It's a bench, the seat doesn't care.

If we take this to seatbelts, then we're talking about a car from decades later. So we first of all have to be careful just what we're stating, before we attach a number to it. Is this the capacity of the original car? (and so the belts just don't matter) Does it mean seats or capacity? Is that a number of adults or of children? All of these figures are "correct" (in some context) and sourcing them will not help, as all are sourceable. This is a question of clarity in expression. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:17, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Number of seatbelts is irrelevant, since it only applies to very much later Type 1s. Capacity was 5, as designed. (That 3 adults in back would be crowded is another matter; 2+2s usually had 2 seats in back, but their suitability for adults, not children or midgets, was pretty notional.) TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 06:48, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Per the 1952 Sales brochure, "...It affords maximum comfort for 4 or 5 persons, including such features as seats cradled between axles to give softly sprung easy-chair comfort. The 1964 sales brochure says, "There is a full length upholstered seat in the back, offering 27.2 inches of space for each passenger. If necessary, three persons can occupy the back seat and still have 17 inches of space for each..." Expandinglight5 (talk) 06:39, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

I'd say that settles it. (And IIRC, the 1938 proposal was for a 5-seater.) TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 15:46, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Depending on the year and country would vary whether it was intended for 4 or 5. Once seatbelt laws were implemented, intended occupancy would change.Expandinglight5 (talk) 20:43, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

My parents owned one first registered in 1966. It only had two seat belts. Was it perforce a two-seater? As I still have vivid memories of travelling in the back seat as a small Mr Larrington (most notably when my father accidentally slammed the door shut on my fingers while we were on a cross-Hong Kong Harbour ferry) I think not. Mr Larrington (talk) 02:53, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Germanys car manufacturers did not mainly produce luxury cars

Contrary to the perception one could get by reading the section about "The People's Car", dozens of manufacturers were already producing vehicles throughout the 1920's and the beginning of the 1930's which were small in terms of size, power output and selling price (e.g. the most known cars Hanomag 2/10 PS "Kommißbrot", Opel 4 PS or Dixi/BMW 3/15) and also saw larger numbers of production.
But since the overwhelming majority of these companies were rather small and the cars being truly manufactured, they couldn't be made in higher volumes and therefore be sold for prices low enough to appeal to the Germans which still were struggling through the aftermaths of WW I, thus explaining why motorcycles were a common mode of individual transportation apart from buses and trains.

In the 1930's, a lot of cars which could have been considered "People Cars" emerged on the German market, even by companies like Mercedes-Benz which were rather known for their upscale and luxury vehicles. The future Volkswagen could be regarded as one of the hobby horses a technically interested Hitler had pursued.

(Fun fact: it is widely reported that Hitler made his tours through Germany during the 1920's in a Selve, a car which was considered as a mid-size vehicle. It is not reported whether Hitler ever owned a driving licence nor if he was driven or driving himself.) --2A02:560:42DB:D800:7404:4103:DC51:54FD (talk) 02:31, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Lady Bug?!?

Käfer generally means beetle in German. The lady bug has the specific name Marienkäfer ("[Holy] Mary's beetle"). I don't know of any special link of the VW Käfer to the lady bug and will remove that connection from the introduction, unless there are objections including sources for the statement. --KnightMove (talk) 10:01, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

True; in German, Käfer is a generic word for beetle. I reckon that this ladybug thing originates from the French word Coccinelle (meaning ladybug) – in France, it is a common word for this article's subject. There are different terms in different languages for this car that all mean something like "beetle", for example, Maggiolino (Italian, cockchafer), Buba (Serbo-Croat, beetle), or Bogár (Magyar, beetle). I don't think that the article should prominently call it a ladybug, because the German word Käfer (as you have already mentioned) does not specifically describe a ladybug, and since there already is a List of names for the Volkswagen Type 1. So I support the removal from the lead. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 11:34, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Done, thanks for the confirmation. --KnightMove (talk) 03:57, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Béla Barényi

This is not my field and I'm not going to edit, but the citation at note 16 does not contain information pertinent to the claims made in the existing article. It should probably be deleted, or the text should be changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomp649 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

I have replaced the ref. Saschaporsche (talk) 08:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

British Military use ?

I assume, Volkswagen Beetle was limited to BAOR (RAF Germany) ? and Berlin. Is that correct ? How long British Military used the Volkswagen Beetle ? --213.172.123.242 (talk) 09:49, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Hans-Georg Mayer writes: „Am 3. Juni erfolgt die Übernahme durch die Engländer. (…) In den nur leicht beschädigten Hallen wurden Fahrzeuge der britischen Besatzungsmacht repariert. (…) In den folgenden Monaten [wurden] aber auch schon wieder Fahrzeuge für die Behörden und Besatzungsmächte gebaut. (…) [Es] konnten bis Jahresende aus Restbeständen 1.785 Fahrzeuge gebaut werden, darunter 977 hochbeinige Volkswagen mit der Karosserie des Kdf-Wagens auf Kübelwagen-Fahrgetellen. (…) Der alte Typ 82 E (…) ging 1945/46 in beträchtlicher Stückzahl (etwa 1.800) an die Besatzungsarmeen. (…) Ab Oktober 1945 ging auch der Käfer mit normalem Fahrgestell wieder in Produktion (…). Die meisten Fahrzeuge gingen als Reparationen an die Besatzungstruppen, wenige an die Deutsche Reichspost oder andere deutsche Dienststellen. (…)“ Hans-Georg Mayer: Der VW-Käfer im Kriege und im militärischen Einsatz danach. Band 114 aus der Reihe Waffen-Arsenal, Podzun-Pallas-Verlag, Dorheim 1988, p. 35–37 ISBN 3-7909-0357-4.

(On 3 June 1945 the control was assumed by the British. Vehicles of the British Armed Forces were repaired in the only slightly damaged Volkswagen plant. In the following months, production of vehicles already receommenced; these vehicles were intended for authorities and British Armed Forces use. In total, 1,785 vehicles were built, of which 977 combined the Kdf-Wagen body with the VW Typ 82 chassis (=Typ 82 E). In 1945/46, the Volkswagen plant delivered many (ca. 1,800) Typ 82 E to the occupying armies. From October 1945, the standard Volkswagen (=Kdf-Wagen chassis and body) was built. Most vehicles were delivered as reparations to the occupying troops, few were delivered to the German Realm Post or other authorities.) Best, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 12:31, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

• I know what de wiki states about that time period, but a specifically precise answer to the above question can not be found in this (was interested in actual "Beetle" Brezelkaefer, not Kubelwagen). Assume it was used until the 1960s, at least in West Berlin, by the British Military. But I do not know exactly... --213.172.123.242 (talk) 15:17, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Poorly written sentence in intro

I have no idea what the second part of this sentence (after 1925) should mean. Suggest a re-write.

Béla Barényi is credited with first conceiving the original design for this car in 1925, notably by Mercedes-Benz, on their website, including his original technical drawing, five years before Porsche claimed to have done his initial version.

Kampala ?

On 26 May 1938, Hitler laid the cornerstone for the Volkswagen factory in Kampala

Kampala ? The capital of Uganada ? Ur serious ? Seems to be a joke edit to me. Or, at the very least - it links to a wrong Kampala.

5.164.213.158 (talk) 01:36, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism, reverted. BilCat (talk) 03:13, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Five mph

I just fixed a {{convert}} error in the article but am now wondering what the sentence means. @Expandinglight5: Your edit from July 2015 (diff) included "5-mph bumper-equipped" which is now "Five miles per hour (8.0 km/h) bumper-equipped". Does that make sense? Johnuniq (talk) 22:51, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

It's a former US safety standard. See Bumper (car)#Zero-damage standards 1976 for details. Perhaps "equipped with a bumper rated for five miles per hour (8.0 km/h)", and link to that article somewhere. BilCat (talk) 23:13, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

version 1500

In the detailed histroy section there is reference to the introduction to the 1500 in 1970 but the second phrase of the sentence then says the 1500 was discontinued in 1970... is this a typo? It's seems unlikely that it would be both introduced and discontinued in the same year but I don't have access to the cited material so I can't confirm or deny. *<:@) - 2024/07/26 13:58 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.133.216.210 (talk) 04:53, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Featured article candidate?

Well, this is my favorite car in the whole world.

Wish this could be a Featured article of English Wikipedia.

I didn't know that it was posible until I found the Aston Martin Rapide article. Sebastián Arena... 15:35, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah i actually wrote both of these articles. It could be an FA, that would just be really hard honestly. 750h+ 15:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

1945 production numbers

The article has contradictory information regarding early production numbers. In the 'KdF-Wagen' sub-section of the History section, it states that production between the end of the war and the end of 1945 was 1,785 vehicles. Later, in the 'Post-war production and success' sub-section of the Tenure section, it states that there were 55 cars produced by the end of the year after production restarted in the last few days of December. It seems logical to me that the factory would not be capable of production for quite a while following the end of the war, so it appears the higher figure is incorrect, however, both figures are sourced. 203.59.50.15 (talk) 07:35, 31 August 2024 (UTC)