How did the D-day become overrated

[RINO Tom]

It is basically US-centrism.

In Germany the basic understandig of the general public is, that the turning point (or at least, the point, that made the turning obvious) was Stalingrad and that if/when a second front was established the German military collapse was only a matter of time, anyway (and the landing at Sicilly somehow does ot count).

I completely disagree with this.  The Western Allies took a huge risk having such a massive amphibious invasion, and Germany easily could have repelled it if not for some breath-taking incompetence by its high command.  Nobody is saying Germany was going to win by this stage, but the Third Reich simply doesn't collapse like it did without Western Allied troops liberating France.  The German retreat on the Eastern Front was always going to push them out of the USSR, but a defiant stand in East Prussia/other eastern areas was not out of the question ... unless they are being attacked from the west, as well.  The landing at Sicily was not nearly as important, other than it knocked out a relatively worthless Italian ally and led to the incredibly foolish German decision to divert even more troops down to Italy.

[RINO Tom]

It is basically US-centrism.

In Germany the basic understandig of the general public is, that the turning point (or at least, the point, that made the turning obvious) was Stalingrad and that if/when a second front was established the German military collapse was only a matter of time, anyway (and the landing at Sicilly somehow does ot count).

Yes. I know that in the context of the Cold War, the western media used to highlight the western European front and erase the eastern European front from the collective memory. That's why I used to think that the narrative of the D-day as the biggest event was built in the middle of the Cold War.
What I learned from this new published book is that this narrative of the D-day was not created in the middle of the Cold War, but when the Cold War was close to the end (1984).

Even if you consider only the battles fought by the western allies, you don't need to consider the Normandy landing the top battle.

Exactly what battles fought by the Western Allies would you say are more important to an Allied victory?  I am guessing it will probably be some other battle that was only possible directly BECAUSE of D-Day.

Calling it D-Day was propaganda from the very beginning.

PLEASE do explain.

[RINO Tom]

Well, most people correlate the French Resistance with De Gaulle, who was an ally of US and the UK, and therefore Day-D as the key battle makes action in the lay (non-french) people understanding of the liberation of France.

Outside of that, I think that USA role in WWII is underrated by some people ("tankies" beig only a part of them). WWII was not the Allies vs the nazis, it was the Allies vs the Axis. The USA was the main actor in the defeat of Japan and its role on the defeat of Italy (even if it was the weak link of the Axis) is appreciable. The role of the brittish in the war agaisnt  Germany, specially in 1940, should neither be underrated.

Even if you consider only the battles fought by the western allies, you don't need to consider the Normandy landing the top battle.

Which one would be for you?

Seriously.  There has been a contrarian trend to go too far in the other direction of Western Cold War propaganda and act like the Soviets were these sole good actors responsible for an Allied victory while the Western Allies just sat on their ass.  This conveniently ignores that they literally TRIED TO BE ALLIES WITH NAZI GERMANY before circumstances pushed them to the Allies (automatic loss of any moral high ground), and they only contributed to the fight against Imperial Japan at the 11th hour once it was clearly over so they could greedily gobble up some territory for themselves...