Talk:German code breaking in World War II

Merge with B-Dienst?

I suggest that it would be sensible to merge the contents of B-Dienst into the B-Dienst section of this article. What do others think? --TedColes (talk) 15:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

• Disagree. Hi TedColes. How are you, on this beautiful Scottish day? I think this article should be only be used as a top index article for German WW2 Cryptography and code breaking efforts and associated WP articles. B-Dienst was a agency, one amongst 5 other military agencies. I've created this article for the OKW/Chi, Oberkommando der Wehrmacht Chiffrierabteilung which was the primary agency for OKW, which I'm still working on. I plan to create articles for the other agencies, including the civilian ones, plus an article about the cryptologic gear and meachanical aids the German Axis forces built and used at the time and tie then all into this article, if the evidence supports it. The Per Z agency seems to play a pivotal role regarding OKW/Chi. It seems to be missing from WP. At the moment it seems all the crypto gear articles, like the Enigma machine article, seem to have some bias towards Britain's effort to break it, during WW2. It's also curious that there is a ton of UK/USA stuff, but no German info. scope_creep talk 16:08 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Grammar

'Instead, each cryptographic department was responsible for cryptanalytic operations.' is not a sentence. 86.178.24.44 (talk) 20:35, 2 December 2014 (UTC)