[Andrey Kuznetsov]

I have read this article.

As it is now more of historiographical interest, I haven't checked it in detail.

Impressions:
1. Groehler conscientiously reproduced data from documents that he was able to familiarize himself with in BA MA. Where there are ready-made results, he, judging by RL2-III/950, reproduced them without errors (Table 19 in his article). There is a dating error in the table header (1.Aug.-31.Aug.42 instead of 1.Jan.-31.Aug.42), but the correct dating is given in the text of the article. Where there were no finished totals, he sometimes made the arithmetic errors in summarising.

2. Some of the text of the article contradicts the data in his tables. Perhaps this was a way to convey archival data to the reader in spite of censorship.

Best regards,
Andrey