Talk:Dirlewanger Brigade

Political Prisoners

never heard of increasing nrs of political prisoners at dirlewanger. or read. I think it's some crappy stunt. I leave it for now as to a certain extend some desperate people may have fell under some of the descriptions, but i think it is weird. It was rather a criminal division and that was as far as i understand it, recognised in the recruitment. These people fell under worse categorys then political prisoners, also repeatedly convicted members of other army units contributed.77.248.56.242 02:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Its membership was originally comprised of poachers. Later it included common criminals. Towards the end of its existance, the "Dirlewanger" unit came to include all outcasts of the Nazi regeim: homosexuals, religious and political prisoners and so on. It can truely be said that this was made up of all persons outlawed by the Nazi regeim. Piercetp (talk) 07:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I would add that many members of this unit, particularly Communists and other leftists deserted and joined forces with Partisans. A number of Veterans even served the in the military and police branches of the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). Piercetp (talk) 07:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

SS-Waffengruppe Aserbaidschan

The Waffengruppe Aserbeidschan was created 30.12.1944 (SS-FHA, Amt II OrgAbt Ia/II, TgbNr. 5248/44 gKdos vom 30.12.1944), and was a part of the Kaukasischen Waffen-Verbandes der SS along with Stab Waffen-Gruppe Georgien, Stab Waffen-Gruppe Armenien and Stab Waffen-Gruppe Nordkaukasus .This unit could not participate to the Wola killings that happened from August 5 to August 8 1944 five months before.(Der Kaukasische Waffen-Verband der SS by Roland Pfeiffer)

Wola killings were mostly inflicted by elements of Kampfgruppe Reinefarth that assaulted the area held by the insurgents from the west. It is hard to determine which specific units are to be held responsible but the main 'cleansing' tasks has been assigned to Angriffsgruppe Dirlewanger with following forces: 2 Grenadier Batallions (I & II) of SS Sturmbrigade Dirlewanger + Aserbeidschanische Feld Bataillon I./111 (com. Hptm. Werner Scharrenberg) + Ostmuselmanisches SS Regiment (without Batallion III) II Btl. "Bergmann" - [without 7. Komp.] Ltn. Mertelsmann Gendermerie Operationsgruppe Walter (2 gendarmerie Komp.) Komp. I & II of Aserb. Feld Btl. I/111 Anti-aircraft battery of 80th Regiment Sturmpanzer-Kompanie z.b.V. 218 [8x Brummbär] Hptm. Kellmann 1/2 of machine gun 4.Kompanie of Aserb. Feld Btl. I/111 1. Platoon of 654. Pioniere Batallion 1 KRONE flamethrower unit (8x Flammenwerfer 41) http://wilk.wpk.p.lodz.pl/~whatfor/niemcy%20_w_powstaniu_warszaws2.htm#reck

Zulfugar (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The photo I uploaded

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ss-dirlewanger_maski.jpg

Someone fix the (annoying) copyrights stuff on its page. I had no idea so I used this "sanctions" excuse, even if it was technically false. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 18:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Haha, yeah. That's a pretty strange rationale. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tchernobog (talk • contribs) 21:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

File:Oskar Dirlewanger.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Oskar Dirlewanger.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Oskar Dirlewanger.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:05, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Altshausen or Althausen

Dirlewanger is said to have been killed in AltShausen (Baden Würtemberg near Ravensburg) with a note 22 indicating a reference on the subject. However, the book refers to the death taking place in Althausen prison in Bavaria. One or the other must be wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.72.163.183 (talk) 16:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 19 June 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved. See little opposition below to this, so request is granted. Much of the concern expressed below is explained in the article's content. The single oppose vote was sans rationale, which does not count much on Wikipedia. It is the rationale that carries weight – editors are strongly encouraged to give their reason(s) for !voting the way they do. Have a Great Day and Happy Publishing! (nac by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  17:22, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

---

36th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS → Dirlewanger Brigade – Per WP:COMMONNAME; the German numerical designation does not appear to be used much. See the Google nGram: . I was unable to search "36th Waffen Grenadier Division", so I used "Waffen Grenadier Division", which is picking up other units but is still lower than "Dirlewanger Brigade". K.e.coffman (talk) 03:38, 19 June 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. bd2412 T 02:46, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

• Comment: This page has already moved several times, for example 13:27, 11 June 2008‎ Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk | contribs | block)‎ . . (54 bytes) (+54)‎ . . (moved SS-Sturmbrigade Dirlewanger to 36th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS over redirect: every other SS division is named this way). There are no previous move discussions in the archives of this talk page. Andrewa (talk) 17:36, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose עם ישראל חי (talk) 14:52, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
• Comment when the end year is moved from 2000 to 2008, it is a lot closer, and according to the later ngram "Waffen Grenadier Division" has recently been more common. However, there were, by my count, some 12 numbered Waffen SS divisions with "Waffen Grenadier Division" in the title, although many of them were only nominal divisions. There are some additional factors that I can see here: a) the other 37 Waffen SS divisions are all titled in this manner, so we are achieving consistency by retaining the current name; b) it was only upgraded to brigade status in October 1944, and became a division in February 1945, so it spent about the same amount of time as both a brigade and division. Prior to that it had a number of different names as it grew: Wilddiebkommando Oranienburg when it was created, then Sonderkommando Dirlewanger, then SS-Sonderbataillon Dirlewanger, then SS-Sonderregiment Dirlewanger, then SS-Sonderbrigade Dirlewanger, then 2. SS-Sturmbrigade Dirlewanger, then 36. Waffen-Grenadier-Division der SS; c) titling it as just Dirlewanger Brigade does not signify that it was part of the Waffen SS, a point that was denied by some war criminals at Nuremberg, so perhaps it should be moved to SS Dirlewanger Brigade (which is used in sources); d) it may be best to leave it at the final name it had; and e) it is strongly associated with Dirlewanger himself, so that would support the move. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:26, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Dirlewanger Division "Emblem"

So, according to Colonel (Ret.) Douglas E. Nash, the infamous "Dirlewanger Division Emblem" which consisted of crossed stick grenade is never worn by the Dirlewanger unit as its infantry or vehicle emblem. This logo was created by the HIAG (Hilfsgemeinschaft auf Gegenseitigkeit der Angehörigen der ehemaligen Waffen-SS) in the 1960s. It was created when they were creating the famous chart of all of the insignia of the Waffen-SS division. However, since the 36. Waffen Grenadier Division der SS never have any actual division insignia (Not to be confused with the Crossed Rifle and Grenade collar insignia) they decided to just create it. It's pure fantasy and yet it persist among the buffs and people who should know better - and there's always those who would said "But it looks cool". Ahem, Nope. Nothing have to do with Dirlewanger Einheit.

Nope.

Best Regards.

= Oymey (talk) 15:03, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Where would I find a source for this? DolyaIskrina (talk) 15:22, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

You have to personally talk to Douglas E. Nash for the source. He knew well about the formation.

Regards

> Oymey (talk) 15:56, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

You could find his post regarding the emblem in this two facebook history research group.

>Research on the SS-Sonderkommando Dirlewanger

>The Black Guard Research Oymey (talk) 15:58, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Reliability of The Cruel Hunters

I've removed material cited to French MacLean's The Cruel Hunters. His website promotes a number of conspiracy theories and historical falsehoods. It includes blog posts like "Is Dr. Anthony Fauci Really a Dr. Josef Mengele?" and "The Wisdom of Crowds" which promotes (via JAQing) the Hitler survival conspiracy theory. He also engages in Holocaust revisionism (writing about Heinrich Müller, he says Müller was also active in resolving the Jewish question) and the Clean Wehrmacht myth (writing about Martin Steglich, he says Martin had little interest in politics and was truly a gentleman of the old school). CamAnders (talk) 16:04, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Which part of the cruel hunters is not reliable may I ask?

Maclean's work is purely based on the actual document from the Sondereinheit itself and all of the documents' folders still can be access online via Invenio site.

Please do tell me which part is not reliable to be use as citation.

Thank you.

. Oymey (talk) 10:46, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Firstly, this article is under a Reliable source consensus-required restriction as it relates to "Polish history during World War II (1933–1945) and the history of Jews in Poland". This means that when a source that is not an article in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal, an academically focused book by a reputable publisher, and/or an article published by a reputable institution is removed from an article, no editor may reinstate the source without first obtaining consensus on the talk page of the article in question or consensus about the reliability of the source in a discussion at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Do not readd MacLean unless there is consensus to do so.

Which part of the cruel hunters is not reliable may I ask? The entire book is unreliable. MacLean is a conspiracy theorist who has repeatedly added his books to Wikipedia in violation of WP:REFSPAM. If he is working from primary sources, and the inclusion of such sources is WP:DUE, then either add the sources directly (being mindful of WP:PRIMARY) or cite a reputable scholar working from the same sources.

Regarding his publisher, Schiffer Publishing: Schiffer Publishing has been described by American historians Ronald Smelser and Edward J. Davies in their 2006 work The Myth of the Eastern Front as one of the leading publishers of war romancing literature, second in North America only to the Canadian publisher J.J. Fedorowicz. According to Smelser and Davies, Schiffer provides a platform for authors who present an uncritical and ahistorical portrayal of the German war effort during the Soviet-German war of 1941–1945. So pretty clearly not an an academically focused book by a reputable publisher. CamAnders (talk) 14:47, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Oymey, I agree with CamAnders that the article on a touchy subject like the Dirlewanger Brigade should not rely on a source written by a conspiracy theorist such as MacLean. Perhaps MacLean had less problematic views when he wrote The Cruel Hunters (it seems like he went through some kind of radicalization over the years), but (as CamAnders already pointed out) the book was also published by Schiffer which is one of the worst-quality publishers on the history of Nazi Germany. Frankly, I also think that all MacLean references should be removed. Applodion (talk) 17:41, 30 January 2026 (UTC)