Talk:Reichstag (institution)
| WikiProject Germany | (Rated Stub-class, High-importance) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Referencing and citation: criterion not met
Structure: criterion met
Grammar and style: not checked| WikiProject Politics | (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance) | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||
[edit] tag/diet
Diet comes from the latin dies (day), so isn't it strange that Tag doesn't refer to day? Did tagen originally mean a daily assembly?
- see German word "Tagung" - Meeting, convention —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.164.211.244 (talk) 08:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Surely it is not true to say that the Reichstag was THE German parliament? It was one of the two Houses of the German Parliament, just like the Bundestag today or the House o Representatives in the US. The other House was the Reichsrat, in which the various German states and Princes were represented, like the Bundesrat today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.138 (talk) 12:11, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Split?
Wouldn't it make sense to separate this, and have one article on the diet of the Holy Roman Empire, and a different article about the German Parliament from 1871 to 1933/1945, or perhaps 1871-1918 and 1920-1933/1945 separately? john k (talk) 07:56, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, it should be split into at least four articles:
- I am not sure if it is worth having an article for Reichstag in the Third Reich (de:Reichstag (Zeit des Nationalsozialismus)), as it might be seen as the same Reichstag of Weimar Republic, just powerless... --Martynas Patasius (talk) 21:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree that a split would make a lot of sense. The institutions were very different, especially with regard to the difference between the Old Reich and the Reichstag from 1867-1945. But as the articles will certainly still grow, the proposed split into four articles is to be preferred to a split in only two articles. --Ziko (talk) 15:35, 29 December 2010 (UTC) Addition: Or make it five, with the NS Reichstag apart. --Ziko (talk) 15:36, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
- I don't mind further splits. I'm not sure the North German Confederation Reichstag really needs its own article, since it could be covered pretty thoroughly in the article on the Second Reich Reichstag, which will have to discuss it anyway. But I don't have an objection. The diet of the Old Reich really needs to be split out, though - it's an entirely different entity. john k (talk) 18:46, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Proposal: (A) Old Reich, (B) 1867-1918, (C) 1919-1945. --Ziko (talk) 21:18, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
- Done - most of the content from the last version of this article ([1]) has been moved to three new articles ([2], [3], [4]). They could still use some cleanup, and I couldn't find a way to fit some content, thus someone else should really take a look... --Martynas Patasius (talk) 21:40, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
- And now all that's left is the small matter of the 900 or so links to Reichstag (institution) that now need to go to the proper article. Volunteers? This tool helps quite a bit. --JaGatalk 09:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
-
-
- Ah, yes, that's a lot... Well, at least that seems to be a good pretext to learn some history... After all, what is the point of editing Wikipedia if not learning about something..? --Martynas Patasius (talk) 20:58, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
-
