Talk:21st Panzer Division

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Germany Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: European / German / World War II This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  European military history task force German military history task force World War II task force

On 23 July 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from 21st Panzer Division (Wehrmacht) to 21st Panzer Division. The result of the discussion was moved.

I am told that the 21st of Afrika Korps was destroyed and the 21st that fought in the west was a new formation. Someone should know this better than I do.

This is absolutely correct, it was indeed a new formation, named after 21st 'Afrika'. I'll put in a bit more info on this to try and expand the article. Dapi89 18:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I intended to greatly expand this article, but I am struggling to find the time, some help would be great!

Dapi89 19:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of this article needs citations. I will add these asap.Dapi89 17:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ROMMEL2.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first photograph of a divisional inspection in Normandy purports to also show Rommel. It does not- the officer, although of general rank , is plainly not Rommel as in the other 2 photos. Can this be corrected ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.123.135.235 (talk) 23:22, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The correction was done. The general is not Rommel, not just because he looks nothing like him but he isn't wearing the throat decorations of the Knights Cross and Pour Le Merite that Rommel habitually wore (see the third photo, for example)213.123.135.235 (talk) 01:21, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Commons description of the picture specifically notes in German that Rommel is making the inspection, but he is out of shot. You can see this is the same inspection as the next two images. However, I can't see the point of having three pictures of the same inspection in this article anyway. (Hohum ^@) 13:19, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:4th Panzer Division (Wehrmacht) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —The Sky Bot 03:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]