Talk:World War II casualties

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More information Article milestones, Date ...
Former good article nomineeWorld War II casualties was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 27, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
Close
More information This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:, Associated task forces: ...
Close

Luxembourg's numbers are wrong

hi, the numbers of luxembourgish casualties are a little wrong. As often described in multiple books, the percentage of casualties compared to the total 1939 population of luxembourg is around 2%, making it the highest loss suffered by a country in western europe. this is mainly due to the battle of the bulge ravaging half of the country. Anyway i have the following numbers out of this book: Michel Pauly : Geschichte Luxemburgs , 2013, ISBN-978-3-406-62225-0 p.102:

  2848 dead luxembourgers forcefully serving in the german Wehrmacht
  2048 dead civilians due to military actions (mainly Battle of the Bulge)
  1208 dead deported luxembourgish jews (in concentration camps)
   791 dead deported luxembourghish political prisoners (in concentration camps) 
   154 dead luxembourgish civilians who were forcefully resettled in the east 
    57 dead luxembourgers due to military actions serving in various allied forced
  7106 total casualties -> which brings it to 2,45% of the total prewar population of luxembourg, like described in many books: highest perecentage loss   of any western-european country. 

This information is in my opinion very important, because the very high death-toll luxembourg had to endure during WWII made the allies recognize Luxembourg's important contribution to the allied war effort and with it Luxembourg's independence was never questioned again. (like after WWI when Belgium and France questionned the commitment of luxembourg to the Entente cause.)

Can somebody please put this right ?

Thank you very much Letzebuergerr

Update citations

hi, citation #11's link is actually http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm instead of the one that's currently on the article. the website switched domains and I would like to see an edit reflecting that.

China was NOT a party to WWII

While China and Japan were at war at dates that overlap with World War II - this was the Sino/Japan War NOT WWII 203.49.88.149 (talk) 07:13, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

China certainly was a party of WWII. at the latest when China declared war on Japan, Germany and Italy in dec. 1941. it had the second number of casualities next to the USSR, emerged as one of the 5 Allied Nations (hence it's permanent seat in the UN-security council) and rightfully celebrated the 80th anniversary of the victory in sep. 2025.
according to your logic ww2 can be described as a series of bi- or multinational campaigns: germano-polish, germano-french/british etc.
what qualifies a war to be called a world war ? geograpical size ? number of nations involved ? ...
the actual start-date of ww2 is not so clear, though. different scholars argue:
- for europe, the spanish civil war might well serve a starting point
- for asia, the japanese attack on china in the same timeframe might be considered as the beginning.
whatever, no serious historian has ever doubted that China was part of ww2. Sinzov (talk) 11:25, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Swedish military deaths too low

While Sweden was neutral during WWII and therefore suffered comparatively few military casualties, the given number (100) only reflect the losses from the volunteers in Finland. If all causes are included, should not accidents such as that in Armasjärvi (46 dead, https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armasj%C3%A4rviolyckan) or the Ulven disaster (33 dead, https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulvenkatastrofen) be included, bringing the number to at least 200? Especially the submarine (Ulven) hitting a mine would have been unlikely in peacetime. ~2025-35399-95 (talk) 16:23, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

Total casualty figures for war

Hello all

Unless I have missed something, I can't see any reliable source cited for the total death toll of 70-85 million and the breakdown of this between military and civilian deaths. If these totals were arrived add by adding up the estimates for individual countries, then that is original research.

It shouldn't be too hard to find scholarly sources which give estimates for the total killed in WWII. For example, Antony Beevor, The Second World War (2012) p 1, gives a figure of "more than 60 million." To avoid original research, the best thing might be to provide a range based on recent estimates of the world totals.

Happy to discuss Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 12:06, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Absolutiva The websites you cite actually say that worldwide deaths were 60 to almost 70 million. The sites also don't say where they got their figures from. In historical articles academic sources are preferred, preferably peer reviewed. There are better sources around and I am working on providing them. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 06:20, 14 January 2026 (UTC)
Sources said in this table that estimated total death toll of 70-85 million. Does anyone have sources for deaths were 60 to almost 70 million? Absolutiva 08:38, 14 January 2026 (UTC)
I have increased estimated deaths to 60-75 million, with citations. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 23:52, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI