Talk:Bombing of Bucharest in World War II

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: 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: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met Associated task forces (nations and regions): Romanian military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): World War II task force

An entry from Bombing of Bucharest in World War II appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 7 September 2006.

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Romania, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Romania-related topics. Please visit the the Wikipedia:WikiProject Romania if you would like to get involved. Happy editing!
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	edit · history · watch · refresh To-do list for Bombing of Bucharest in World War II:
No to-do list assigned; you can help us in improving the articles in the same category

Contents 1 American losses 2 RAF flying P61s? 3 Victoria Palace 4 RAF did not fly P61s 5 There were no American films in Bucharest during the war 6 RS

[edit] American losses

"Hundreds of American soldiers were killed or taken prisoner": I'm a bit confused. Not a common result in an aerial bombardment for the attackers to take hundreds of losses. If accurate there must be a story here worth telling. Or was it not entirely an aerial operation? If so the article should make that clear. - Jmabel | Talk 01:51, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I have two sources for that comment: one, the Tidal Wave (1943) article, and two, this article, in the paragraph beginning "Istoricul Mihnea Romalo"... The Wikipedia article claims 53 aircraft lost, 310 killed, and 108 captured; the latter source has figures of 42 aircraft lost, 600 dead and 263 taken prisoner. I have no idea which is accurate, but losses were definitely substantial and due to anti-aircraft fire, which had a high hit rate due to the low altitude at which the American pilots flew (according to the Tidal Wave Wikipedia article).

I didn't elaborate on the point because the Bucharest bombing is the main point of the article and because we already have an article on Tidal Wave, which is where these issues should probably be sorted out in greater detail. Still, a sentence on the order of "These heavy losses were due to anti-aircraft fire, which managed to hit so many planes due to the very low altitude at which they were flying" might not be completely amiss. Biruitorul 04:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RAF flying P61s?

Worth checking this line against sources: 'This time, the RAF used P-61 Black Widows to carry out the operation' - as the embedded Black Widow link shows, it would have been interestingly unusual for the (UK) RAF to have sortied in these. Perhaps it was the (US) USAF that used them, or perhaps it was indeed the RAF but in e.g. Mosquitos. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.129.158.93 (talk • contribs) 7 September 2006.

[edit] Victoria Palace

I would guess that the "Victoria Palace" referred to here would be an entirely different building than the present-day building that is linked, which I think is a communist era building. But I have no citation, and this is nothing but conjecture on my part. Am I wrong? - Jmabel | Talk 18:22, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it was built in 1937. I was quite surprised to learn that myself (I first read it in Giurescu, see History of Bucharest; rowiki says the same). It is part of a Stalinist complex, but I guess Carol's version of art deco just blended in with all the five-cornered stars on lamposts... The International Totalitarian Style. Dahn 23:57, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. - Jmabel | Talk 05:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The building which is called in the article Victoria Palace was actually, at that time the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It had been built in 1937 by architect Duiliu Marcu. It was never part of a "Stalinist complex" and had no soviet influence. Actually stalinist architecture is completely different, and example of such architecture being the "House of the Scânteia" (the official newspaper of the Communist Party). There was no stalinist building ever built in the proximity of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Duiliu Marcu had planned other similar buildings in the Victoria square, but these plans were never completed because of the war. The development of the rest of the Victoria Square (after the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) was completed only during the Ceauşescu era and the design is completely different than the one envisaged by Duiliu Marcu. It was the style which had been used for Romanian official buildings between the two world wars, another example being the Ministry of Interior. The destination of the building was changed only at the beginning of the 1950s when it was taken over by the ouncil of Ministers. It has nothing to to with an International Totalitarian Style (which actually does not exist). Afil 20:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Learn to take a joke. (Btw, the style of those buildings was directly inspired by urban architecture in totalitarian states, and the international style was argued to exist by several art historians, as an offshoot of art deco; in Romania, it usually took the Italian fascist-inspired form of the Faculty of Law; all of this is in connection with the FRN rule. The Stalinist complex I was referring to includes the boulevards and the street lamps decorated with communist symbols, as well as the buildings on one of its sides, all of which are post-1948.) Dahn 20:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RAF did not fly P61s

RAF definitely never used P61 "Black Widow" on operations. Furthermore they were not yet in service in Europe even in the USAAF in April 1944. In any case it would be very unusual to use night fighters for dropping flares for bombers and the P61A version wasn't even equipped with bomb racks. In short: at least that part of the entry is pure nonsense.

TTY —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.181.185.151 (talk • contribs) 15 October 2006.

[edit] There were no American films in Bucharest during the war

There were no American films during the war. The author of the source article indicated that he was a first grader at the time of the bombardments and is quoting only out of memory. In any case, Gone with the Wind was not screened in Bucharest until the widescreen version was issued. The screening of westerns started in Bucharest in September 1944.

This does not mean that Romanians at that time were not asking for American productions. In 1943-1944, the big American hit was Eugene O'Neil's Mourning Becomes Electra, which was played at the National Theatre of Bucharest with George Vraca playing three roles.

Afil 20:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RS

are e-referate.ro and other sites that host school essays written by anonymous people reliable sources?Anonimu 08:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm gonna have to agree with you on that one. We should find a proper source to replace that. Dahn 08:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)