Talk:Ferdinand Porsche

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Science and Academia (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Motorsport / History of Motorsport  (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Motorsport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Motorsport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the History of Motorsport taskforce (marked as Mid-importance).
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated Start-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Pronunciation[edit]

How is Porsche pronounced? Is his surname French alike? Where is an accent - on first o or on the last e? Best regards. --XJamRastafire 00:52 Sep 9, 2002 (UTC)

I would say Pohrzje NL Buttonfreak 17:24, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
How complicated, and with at least two mistakes!
Simply like "Porshe", stressing the first syllable.
Sound details: short, slightly open "o" like in "Johnny" (NOT tending to "aw"), short, rolling "r" pronounced like in Spanish or Italian, "sh" voiceless, "e" like in "ave" (ave Maria) very short and without the least diphtongue-tendency (no "ay").
joeditt 01:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

We have the IPA in now, so perhaps it doesn't matter. But "pahr shuh" is about the best one can do by english rules. Note that the german R is usually not rolled, but more like a french R (which is also not rolled, of course). :)
überRegenbogen 03:29, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh, is that so amongst German-speaking folks round your home in ... Alabama?
I admit there's basically two ways of pronouncing "R" - of which the one equaling the French habit may be spread more widely. Yet, people with no experience in German language tend to associate it with vocals also pronounced like in French, so this can be misleading. The "R" rolled like in Spanish or Italian is preferred in German stage language, especially in classic plays: it's more audible and matches better with vocals pronounced clear and precise. And those not capable of it accentuate their palatal version more sharply. This is no contradiction to your explanation - however, an essentially necessary completion.
But I have absolutely no clue what the frog-in-the-throat you tried to approximate by "pahr shuh".
And yes, the IPA definitely is a fine thing. But I would appreciate it even more if anyone could manage to find out how it easily can be added at least to Windows (um, well ... 98 ff), Mac OS and Linux - and then get the referring links with a short description onto the Help Contents page. Only then is the time to cross out this thread's title to mark it as settled. -- Greets, joeditt (talk) 00:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I see I have to specify this. Yes, the IPA symbols are there now - in the edited version of this article, and presumably of several others.

(a) But only recently, I stumbled upon a lot of articles containing fonts obviously not (as) compatible, showing lots of small squares instead - so, there still seems some work to be done.

(b) And I accidentially managed to correct the pronunciation of "Porsche" here (it must end with an (IPA-)"e", not an "ə" - the latter would be correct only if the written ending were "-er", not just "-e") - only because the "ə"-symbol was recognizable in the editing version (shown in some version of Courier), but the rest, except "p", were all symbolized by equal-looking small squares. Does that mean my only chance is to paste-and-copy the previous phonetic version from the article page (if there is one, and in case it needs correction) and (or only) the signs from the Help:IPA page (which seemingly might lack some characters that may be needed, as it shows "Main symbols" ... only), then compose in some other text program window that shows the characters properly (how do I make sure it does?), and then copy it into the editing window, hoping what shows up there as a row of illegible squares will turn back into the signs I intended them to be when I save it? Is there really, really, really no easier procedure than this kinda half-blind flight?

Phew. -- joeditt (talk) 01:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Next step. Already the number of steps to be taken show this cannot be the final solution. As a mere encyclopedia user - like those for whom all this is made - I'd expect to find a phonetic version which either shows up already perfectly legible, or comes with three links (for the main operating system groups), each leading to one or two buttons (depending on my system's version) for initiating a reliable installation after which I can read all phonetic entries on any Wikimedia Foundation site. Anything deserving the least additional effort fails to meet the basic requirements of usability.
Well, now let's return to the contributors' perspective.
There is the IPA article, containing a downloads section, and another dedicated to keyboard input. Unfortunately, the downloads seem not really complete - and the one closest to completion, in one version "suffers from extremely bad hinting when rendered by Freetype on Linux", or, in another, is available "in a single face, roman". The page doesn't even clearly tell what this means: do the characters show up in Roman style on article pages, meaning this is just sort of an aesthetical problem? Or are they illegible, because articles are exclusively in characters of the Arial/Helvetica/Sans family?
Not a well-finished Help page that (1) needs some research to be found at all, and (2) almost raises more questions than it answers. One is: if I install version x, what is my computer able to show correctly afterwards? All the signs it contains no matter if they were created with x, y, or z - or exclusively what has been created with x?
And the keyboard input signs: how are they to be handled? Paste-and-copy? Why is there no hint how they show where (with which operating system / on article pages / in editing windows / for other users using which system, having additionally installed what font)? Why is this all left to each and every user's trial and error - eating up time, causing additional traffic?
Nice attempts, sure - but still semi-finished at best. Too early for general "We have the IPA in now" cheers instead of "we're on the way", and "if you want to help, this or that is what you could do". -- joeditt (talk) 02:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Erwin Komenda[edit]

To the anon IP who insists on putting in a sentence and link about Erwin Komenda - yes, there is a case that Komenda gets too little credit and Porsche gets too much credit for the design of several cars. However, Ferdinand Porsche's page is not the right place to go into that. It is appropriate to mention it on the Porsche page, and the pages of the cars he designed or helped design.

This is, by the way, a common situation. The leader of the design team gets all the credit even if much or all of the work is actually done by someone they employ. The same is true for many industrial designers (much of the work attributed to Raymond Loewy, for example, involved no pencil-to-paper on the part of Raymond; employees did all the work, the boss just chose out of possibilities presented to him and gave direction)

--Morven 16:54, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I can agree that the Komenda reference probably does not belong here. The dispute about the development is with the son rather than the father.
Still, under the circumstances, making the statement that Ferry was the developer is a disputed fact that invites a claim by the opposing camp. I have therefore changed "developer" to "eponym", since there is at least no apparent dispute about the source of the automobile's name. This maintains the familial link with the vehicle without getting into the substantive dispute at the wrong place. Eclecticology

18:09, 2003 Oct 28 (UTC)

Thanks, that may at least defuse things a little.

My personal thought is that if this is to get any mention on Ferdinand or Ferry Porsche's page the text should relate to them directly, rather than being the same cut and paste sentence.

Mentioning that Ferdinand Porsche gets most of the popular credit for a lot of things that were actually as much or more a product of his employees, and pointing out that this is common practice in the design industry -- the boss gets the credit -- would be a bit more NPOV. Mentioning Komenda as one of those who gets overlooked in favor of the boss would be OK for me too.

--Morven 22:46, 28 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Before I get any further on this subject, I would like clarificaton about the relative roles of Ferdinand and Ferry in this issue. I would like to see the fact of Ferdinand's univolvement nailed down before I approach the matter of Ferry, or before I try to address the simple revert battle now going on here.
The bulk of the story clearly belongs on the Komenda page. A one-sentence reference on the Ferry page saying that Ferry's claim is disputed is appropriate, and it should then refer those who want more on the story to the Komenda page. Eclecticology 01:57, 2003 Oct 29 (UTC)
This is the situation that I think is the truth, from my reading. When Ferdinand Porsche set up an independent engineering consultancy in Germany (in the 30s?) although he was the company founder and head engineer he employed a number of other engineers - the jobs were too big for just one man. Among the men he employed was Erwin Komenda, who had previously worked for Daimler-Benz and before that Steyr. Komenda was an expert in auto body construction and the engineering of pressed sheet metal bodywork, that I can determine.
Ferdinand Porsche's field of expertise seems to have been the mechanical aspects of vehicles, engines and the like, and the overall team direction. Komenda worked on the bodywork of the KDF-wagen (later to become the Beetle) among others. Komenda definitely worked on translating ideas for the basic shape into sheet metal and the detail design of the bodywork. Many of the plans and patent applications from this period are signed by Komenda and applied for with his name on them. Whether his were the first pencil sketches that were turned into auto bodies I am less sure. It's certainly possible that they were, though I am sure others in the team including Ferdinand Porsche had a lot of input.


JUST A THOUGHT:

Shouldn't this page consider division into chapters:

(i.e.) --Early Life --WWI --WWII

Porche is a fascinating man with a career so linked with the World Wars -- but that almost seems lost and in this bio. His involvement in WWII with the Nazis in both the Racing circuit and in the War effort really shaped his life and that that of the world. He represents a true place in history - so perhaps a chapter insersion could better work here. Just a suggestion. DH - 10/16/05

Postwar, Porsche's son Ferry and the other engineers who had worked for Ferdinand during the war came together (initially in Austria) to design cars. Ferdinand was imprisoned until 1949 for war crimes relating to the use of slave labor in projects he worked on.
Between them, a car was designed that became the Porsche 356. Komenda played a big part in this. It would be incorrect to say that he was the designer, per se, because he only worked on the bodywork. However, its construction was his, and probably much of its styling. He also worked in a similar capacity for later Porsche cars.
What I think needs to be done is to write more about Ferdinand's consultancy and Ferry's postwar sports car company so Komenda can be placed in his proper context. WHen part of a larger article it will seem less 'heavy'.

Protected[edit]

In this case, it's rather difficult to revert to a pre-edit-war version. Since there's no getting around the fact that I agree with Wik that the link should not be included, I have protected the page on a version including the link, to avoid the perception of bias.

I've seen both Wik and Lir resort to edit wars (not infrequently with each other), and there's something you both need to understand: edit wars are bad, futile, pointless, immature, and a breach of Wikiquette. Use the Talk page already, will you? -- Cyan 02:28, 30 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Wik makes personal attacks against me; and refues to discuss things with me. Lirath Q. Pynnor

Erwin Komenda (cont'd)[edit]

If Kommenda and Porsche worked together, then there should be a see also from this page to that of Kommenda's. Lirath Q. Pynnor

Some context around the link would make that clear. Having the link as a "see also" at the bottom gives it an emphasis that isn't so good. -- Cyan 18:09, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)

If you want to add context, you might as well write a paragraph in the main article; which explicitly describes their relationship. In the meantime, a see also is an indicator that there is some sort of relationship -- I don't see how it gives any emphasis, its more of a de-emphasis since it seems to indicate that the relationship is such that nobody has seen fit to actually write about it. Lirath Q. Pynnor

Perhaps it's fairer to say "gave", rather than "gives". I believe Morven said something about that link having been posted on every article having to do with Porsche. That's the emphasis I was talking about. -- Cyan 21:17, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Well, thats an issue for those pages. Komenda should not be linked from every article having to do with Porsche; but, he should definitely be linked from this page, and the page regarding the Porsche Company; because, he was Porsche's chief engineer. He deserves mention here, just as Cheney deserves mention at the GW Bush page. Lirath Q. Pynnor

This is all just spam by Komenda's granddaughter, Iris Steineck, who is acting like Daniel C. Boyer. Most of the references to Komenda on the web are also planted by her. Any biography of Porsche not influenced by her will show that Komenda was just one of many people on his staff. Karl Rabe was chief engineer, not Komenda, who was just responsible for the body design, and I don't see why this should be considered more important than the other departments. Either all those people should be mentioned or none. --Wik 22:45, Oct 31, 2003 (UTC)
Mentioning all of them of importance would probably be a good idea. Iris Steinenk does have a good point that ascribing all the work of Porsche-the-company to Porsche-the-man is inaccurate, and a more detailed article would satisfy that criticism and be more accurate and informative besides. --Morven 22:52, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Hello Wik, thanks for fixing my spelling errors. I just shouldn't write articles that early in the morning, with eyes still half closed. -- JeLuF 19:46, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

the company of Ludwig Lohner[edit]

Dear Authors,

Please note: Ferdinand Porsche joined the company of Ludwig Lohner and not Jacob Lohner. I think the wording should be corrected accordingly. See http://www.aeiou.at/aeiou.encyclop.l/l826666.htm

Please note: Disregard this: It is the same company.

Regards, --Millisits 23:06, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

German/Austrian[edit]

There is a lot of confusion in this page. Then it is German, then it is Austrian.

According to al sources I have, Porsche is an Austrian, so he should be listed as an Austrian inventor, not German. Some of the cars he made were made in Germany, these are German cars. Some of them were made in Austria (Austria-Hunagary) and should be called Austrian. My sources tell he worked for Lohner, Austro-Daimler of Austria and for Daimler-Benz, Zündapp, NSU, KdF (later to be Volkswagen) and Porsche (though initially set up in Gmünd, Austria). NL Buttonfreak 17:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Porsche was an Austrian FROM Bohemia, right. Moved to Germany, right. And yes, Gmünd is in Austria (in Carinthia - there's, a.o., another Gmünd in northern Lower Austria at precisely 15° E longitude). Only, that Austria-Hungary hint is puzzling. The Austro-Hungarian monarchy, having caused WW I, ended in 1918. After other nations' split-off, the country then equaled today's Austria - plus Southern Tyrol. ▪ joeditt 01:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Porsche was a German. Both of his parents were German nationals living in the Kingdom of Hungary which was, for a time, known as Austro-Hungary. I am not going to change the wiki without additional support from other historical researchers, but I believe this will be confirmed over time. The facts are, he was born into the Kingdom of Hungary and not Austro-Hungary. Check the time-line. He would actually be more of a Hungarian national than a Austrian. However, he considered himself a German most of his adult life. Of course, he did work for Austrian companies. This, however, does not make him Austrian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.232.251.65 (talk) 03:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The german wiki says he was born in Bohemia, which was part of the Austrian part of austria-hungary, not the kingdom of hungary. so he was born within the austrian borders -> he was austrian, no doubt. Eromae (talk) 19:31, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

My dear Austrians: You only can get Porsche if you take Hitler, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.192.35.88 (talk) 12:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Nazi Stuff[edit]

I removed the "Nazi Leader" and "SS" categories, until someone can proof that he was either enlisted in SS or that he took any active role in the Third Reich other than that of a automotive engineer.

Jack O'Neill 05:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Supposedly, Ferdinand used slave labor to build the beetle. Is there any proof for or against this? --65.102.201.210 (talk) 15:42, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Now it says he was an "SS activist". From what I've read, he was largely apolitical. He mostly cared about cars and things that mattered to cars. He did enjoy a class system and was rather taken aback when visiting the Ford factory and the managers ate with the workers and everybody carried their own trays. But that doesn't make him an SS activist, so I'm taking it out until somebody provides a link. Nerfer (talk) 22:02, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

That Porsche was a member of the Nazi party (albeit a late arrival) and of the SS is certainly relevant to his biography, but putting it front and center is unwarranted. To proclaim that he was what he was only because he was a Nazi or a member of the party is a personal opinion of one account and unsupported by historic research. --Lukati (talk) 23:33, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
We went over this below with the discussions of Nazi logos Cimmerian praetor wanted to add. Porsche's Nazi connections should be included, and no details should be omitted. But he is best known for cars. That belongs at the top of the lead. It's fine in the second paragraph of the lead. But I don't agree with this deletion. Any memorial -- or removal of a memorial -- to the subject of an bio belongs in that bio. We're not talking about a separate article on Vratislavice. So yes to Cimmerian praetor's additions, but no to his spotlighting the Nazi stuff. And no to the logos and badges. We should, however, add the photos of Porsche in his many meetings with Hitler and other high ranking Nazis. The Life magazine photos are great but we can't get copyright so we have to use the ones on Commmons. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:13, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
I reworded the paragraph about the "memorial". I consider this controversy to be of mostly local relevance. I don't object to it being included, but giving it an independent subheading is overkill in my opinion. --Lukati (talk) 00:46, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Where is the WWII coverage?[edit]

It strikes me as odd that one of the most highly regarded engineers of German tanks and tank destroyers gets so little attention paid to his WWII designs such as the Tiger, Tiger II and Elephant. If anyone has any sourcable material to add to this neglected era of his life would they please do so? NeoFreak 00:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Adding these facts as facts - in Wikipedia/-media's spirit - is a good idea. But not according to the here chosen words, as if otherwise sort of an honoring duty would be "neglected". Like there should be knowledge of Wernher von Braun's contribution to the V2 which fortunately was developed late enough to help the allied forces overcome the Nazi's terror regime, but never seeing a lack of such information as a "neglection" of von Braun's work. Hope you just expressed your thought imprecisely. ▪ joeditt 01:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Its like this with many pages with Nazi associations (Mercedes). Facts folks! This guy built/designed weapons for the Nazi War Machine, in addition for building the car for Hitler's " Master Race" lol. CJ DUB 03:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I also call for greater detail on his involvement with the Nazi regime. His designs were instrumental to the Nazi domestic and military programs, a relationship that lacks proper emphasis in this article. Possible verifiable sources include the following:

In his new book, "The Nazi Criminals of Stuttgart," Viehover surveys the role of the city's residents in the Third Reich. A significant chapter is devoted to Porsche's founder, Ferdinand Porsche (1875-1951). Viehover describes him as "Hitler's favorite engineer" and says the men knew each other. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1120124.html

And,

Ferdinand Porsche himself served Hitler during the war as the head of his tank commission. He supported Hitler's power and profited from the regime. Nevertheless, Mommsen believes that "the question as to the extent to which Porsche understood the criminal character of the regime he served must remain open." http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,637368,00.html

Both quotes were retrieved from their respective sources on 04/01/2010 11:07 AM MST. Offchance (talk) 18:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Here we are are years later from my original comment, and the history section jumps from 1930s to Postwar 1950s. I guess nothing happened there. Should be some paragraph of how this man took advantage of slave labour in WWII. It sad actually how many wiki entries for German companies have been washed of WWII activities. CJ DUB (talk) 04:00, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Sounds like User:Offchance has some good information on this, but never updated the article. I know of Porsche mostly because of the VW connection, so personally haven't found much about him working on tanks and such (were the tanks successful? I seem to recall they weren't widely used, or maybe that was WWI). But yes, I agree it should be included (history jumps from 1939 to 1945). Presumably he also worked on kubelwagens and schwimmwagens during this time. Nerfer (talk) 16:26, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Porsche Czech?[edit]

According to the German Wikipedia he was Austrian. Since he was born in Austria-Hungary that seems logical to me and I'll change that now. One could rather argue whether he considered himself as German or Austrian, but to call him a Czech is just ridicoulous.--217.85.73.92 20:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

What about Bohemian? To call him a Czech is as ridiculous as calling him German or Austrian. Ethnicity does not matter, at that time, you could probably choose to call yourself German or Austrian or Czech. Remember Masaryk considered himself Czech, while his mother was german-speaking and his father from Slovakia. 131.188.24.10 22:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, yes his birth place is in the modern day Czech Republic but because that country did not exist at the time being part of the Austo-Hungarian Empire that makes him Austrian. I'm not sure what his complete ethnic background was but I think it would be best to refer to him as an Austrian as that was, if I recall correctly, what he considered himself to be. NeoFreak 15:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Right: today, the Porsche Family is mostly considered Austrian, having moved to Germany. Yet, I - as an Austrian - must reject the argument that neither the Czekoslovakian nor the Czech republic did exist: that's as if you'd insist Benjamin Franklin was British, and not (even later becoming) an US citizen, because the USA didn't exist before 1776. "Ethnicity doesn't(didn't) matter" is misleading: there was neither estimation of ethnical or cultural diversity nor equality. The Habsburg's Austrian empire expanded partly by strategic marriages, not only by (expensive and risky) battles - mainly colonizing inland territories (incl. settlement of loyal state clerks made reliable & thankful by getting accomodations and safe state jobs, or farms larger than they owned back home). I.e., some of today's German-speaking enclaves in GUS states audibly grew up with a language based on centuries-old versions of Upper Austrian dialects. After a rather peaceful coexistence for centuries, rejection against the Habsburg's paternalism was re-awakened in the 19th century, discharging into the empire's breakup in 1918, and re-awakened even stronger when the Nazi, after occupying Czekoslovakia, made use of German-speaking citizens to administrate and safeguard their terror regime. Returning to be suppressed by intruders - with the help of people living in their own country, even personal friends - of the same basic foreign mother language explains a.o. the Czech partisans' overreaction in 1945: my own great-grandmother (German-speaking Moravian) died during that displacement march, whereas my (German-speaking Bohemian) stepmother for some years experienced life in Leipa was easier when she avoided to speak German. Should be dealt with on related history pages, but I wanted to add some background to the above remark "you could probably choose to call yourself German or Austrian or Czech" - sure you could, but I think the people, in this case Bohemians, Moravians and Slovakians, deserve a more sensitive statement than what might be seen as return to more than just partiotical pocketing attitudes usual in earlier decades and i.e. letting us Austrians declare Hitler a German and Beethoven a Viennese.

Not knowing what Ferdinand Porsche considered himself, I'd call him an Austrian from Bohemia - not leaving away the second part -, who moved to Germany. So, I wouldn't bluntly call him Czech (or merely Austrian) in an article that should inform correctly, but I also wouldn't comment such an attribution harshly as "ridiculous", much less with unacceptable, quasi-colonialist arguments. Who would daresay it's "ridiculous" to call Chopin a Pole (who moved to France) instead of a "Russian", as from more than a decade before his lifetime till many decades after (with a partial, short exception by Napoleon) "there was no Poland on the map." Go try stating this somewhere in Chicago ... ▪ joeditt 01:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, NeoFreak is right. Porsche was Austrian, and he and his whole family considered themselves to be Austrians. That's the way it is. Interesting point made by the ip concerning Masaryk. Things obviously aren't as simple as they seem to be. --Catgut 03:41, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I updated the "Early years" intro once more: mentioning the czech name Vratislavice first is more appropriate, as German names have been added later - after the Habsburgs' inland colonization. Like I would never dare to respectlessly call e. g. Zimbabwe "former Rhodesia", as if the British had been there first. -- joeditt (talk) 20:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"Nazi-speaking"[edit]

"Ferdinand Porsche was born to Nazi-speaking parents"

What the hell is a nazi-speaking person? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.226.51.200 (talk) 18:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Nazi images[edit]

In 1937, Ferdinand Porsche joined the Nazi Party and SS, reaching the rank of Oberführer in the latter during the war.
Porsche, being a member of NSDAP and SS-Officer, was awarded SS-Ehrenring and War Merit Cross during the WW2.

It seems that there is some disagreement as regards use of pictures complementing part about Porsche's Nazi background. I have added those since they are very fitting to the topic, and of course, also because I am appalled that until now, an article about an SS-Officer did not have a single mention of the man being a Nazi.

As alternative, I propose the ehrenring and war merit cross instead of swastika and SS. However I must insist that this part of the article, added by me, shall be accompanied by fitting pictures. As long as we don't have a CC picture of Porsche in SS uniform (with all the skulls and other stuff), these are the best options of pictures accompanying the text available.Cimmerian praetor (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I fully agree that an article on somebody who was a prominent contributor to the German war effort should give proper weight to his involvement with the Nazi party. I just felt that the images added nothing and were no more than cheap sensationalism. Imo the single image of the ring would be sufficient.TheLongTone (talk) 20:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
And btw you can't insist on anything. Wikipedia is consensus-driven. Talk of insisting is asserting an intention of POV-pushing & ironically given the context, symptomatic of a totalitarian mindset.TheLongTone (talk) 20:26, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Being the original contributor of the part about his Nazi past and being the original contributor of the images into the article, I do have a full right to insist on them being there, at least until a consensus is built to the contrary. As long as you are the only opposing person, it is a common courtesy not to remove content added by someone else.
In case I feel need for a diagnosis of my mindset, I shall revert to you. Until then, please keep your clinical opinions to yourself. Thank you. Regards Cimmerian praetor (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
I appreciate the expansion of the article to cover his Nazi connections, and the photo of Hilter with the swastika flags at the VW plant opening is probably relevant. But slathering the article with even more photos of Nazi logos and symbols is excessive and sensationalistic. Per WP:TONE, Wikipedia articles should be formal and sober, not hysterical. And the Nazi logos don't tell us anything specific about Ferdinand Porsche. A photo of Ferdinand Porsche in a Nazi uniform, or meeting with Nazi officials, would be relevant (e.g [1][2][3][4][5]), but just logos and badges are not. They only serve to beat the reader over the head with the point that he was a Nazi. It isn't necessary to belabor it that much. But otherwise, good work improving the article. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:40, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
If somebody makes an ill-judged edit it gets amended. that's wikipedia. Common courtesy doesn't come into it.TheLongTone (talk) 21:49, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Also known as the :BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:56, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
OK, this solves the swastika issue. What about the alternative proposal (right)?Cimmerian praetor (talk) 22:57, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Also, I don't agree with you assessment. Being Nazi collaborator was a large part of Porsche's success. Yes, he was a genius engineer, but he could have never pulled off what he managed without the backing of the Nazi party. Even the Volkswagen would most probably be stopped due to infringement of Tatra's patents. He intentionally became the poster boy for the Nazi Party and SS in order to promote his engineering ideas. Hence it is not beating the reader over the head, it is just a small reminder of what made Porsche who he was in the end. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 23:03, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
If you know of objective historians who share those opinions, by all means, add them to the article and cite them. But no, the other images are no better than the logos. They're sensationalistic and the POV-pushing is blatantly obvious here. This photo is much more informative, showing an actual scene from Porsche's life and illustrating his relationship with Hitler and the other Nazis. Or this one. Assuming we can work out any copyright questions; I don't know the provencnae of those photos. And there are already three photos of Porsche alongside his Nazi friends at Commons which I pointed out. Use one of those photos or import one of the others I suggested to Commons. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:32, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
As much as I respect your opinion, I just don't see what is sensational about them (let's agree to disagree on that). Taking into consideration, that Porsche was a very talented engineer who lived in 1930s and 40s Germany, moreover working on designs crucial for the Nazi party - Volkswagen (propaganda value) and the tanks (military value), it would be impossible for him not to be photographed with the top Nazi figures. That is something inevitable under the circumstances. Becoming member of NSDAP and for God's sake, the SS, that is a whole different thing. None of the pictures you proposed speaks to that (that is why I said that the most preferable would be Porsche in SS uniform, which he must have had, even though it seems he didn't wear it too often).
It is the same difference as using slaves in the factory, which would be most probably inevitable, and choosing to use SS-Men as security and later having a special VW-SS Unit. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 06:29, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
You say he couldn't avoid being photographed with Nazis, but by the same token, could he avoid joining the Allgemeine SS or the SS mannschaft? He obviously wasn't a member of the Waffen-SS or the SS-Totenkopfverbände. And since he was never photographed in uniform, it calls into question whether he performed any SS duties at all. Perhaps it was merely an honorary title he couldn't refuse. Or perhaps he was an enthusiastic supporter of the Nazis and their most loyal troops. Either way, you'd need to cite sources specifically saying so one way or the other. What we don't do is slather Nazi logos all over an article and let the reader fill in the blanks. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:18, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
This is like listening to Jan_Fischer_(politician), the 2013 Czech presidential candidate: "I joined the party only to make my life easier, but I was never really a die-hard communist".
Sir, Mr. Porsche was a Nazi and was a member of SS. There is no letting the reader fill in the blanks.
And - putting SS-membership and honorary into the same context is something I just refuse to comment on. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 21:36, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Cool your jets. Put all that is necessary about Porsche's involvement with the Nazi Party, contribution to the German industrial war effort, (as long as properly referenced): do not sensationlise the article, which ultimatly weakens your case by making the article look tawdry. And don't 'shout. And in the context honorary is the right word to use. Its an honour conferred by a bunch of criminal sociopaths, which speaks for itself.TheLongTone (talk) 22:36, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I have no case. I came to this article and found out that it completely lacks any information on Porsche's political background, despite him being one of the poster boys of Nazi propaganda, moreover not only a Nazi, but also SS-Man.
Being a member of an organization is a willful decision. By 1937, it was clear that Nazis were preparing a war of aggression as well as a hell on earth for all untermensch, so no one can argue "forgive him, for he did not know what he was doing" (which may be an argument if he joined the party in 1923). I shall add parts dealing with the fact that Porsche chose to use slave labor in order to be able to push the price of the VW Beetle under RM 1.000, as promised to Hitler (unfortunately I don't have the time to get this article in shape completely, also regarding the non-Nazi stuff). Cimmerian praetor (talk) 07:40, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Good for you. I would imagine that this page was largely written by automobile enthusiasts working from sources written by other car enthusians, so its lack of political context is, although regrettable, understandable. (myself, I think cars themselves are a creation of the Devil).TheLongTone (talk) 09:49, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Any real car enthusiast could not omit Porsche's relation to Hans Ledwinka and the theft of Tatra's patents, which were essential for effective cooling of an engine placed in the rear (Tatra invested the kind of effort and money into this research which a Volskauto start-up - even with NSDAP backing - could hardly put together); even the most high end water cooled front engine cars of the era, such as Rolls Royce, could not cope with the new German highways and would overheat with a frequency that could bring the owners to the edge of madness (especially considering the cars' cost). Therefore I suppose this was written mostly by Porsche enthusiasts, rather then by car enthusiasts in general.
I still don't see why a picture of an ehrenring, one of the rarest SS decorations, would do any bad to the article (while its descriptive effect would surely help the article).
I got to this article after finding out that Porsche AG removed its cars from Porsche's birth house/museum after a section dealing with Porsche's Nazi/SS background was added there. As politically correct about Nazism Germans in generally are today (I lived there for a year), it shows that many, especially in the Porsche management, still can't cope with this past. Removing any direct pictorial connection of Porsche to Nazism (sorry, picture of Hitler+Swastika+VW Bug ain't it - that was simply 1930/40s Germany) seems to fall into the same category, at least for me. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 11:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Maybe the ring, but the double image is overkill and the cross is not a very interesting image. This article actually needs restructuring: there is no section at all on what Porsche did in the war. I am not interested in armoured vehicles and so have nothing on them in my library (don't have anything on cars either), so can't really contribute much.TheLongTone (talk) 11:58, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

War crimes ?[edit]

The article says he was arrested by the French on war crimes and "The innovative 4WD design never raced, but the money it received was used to redeem Ferdinand Porsche from prison." What does that mean ? Used to pay bail to get him out, and he was later found innocent of the charges ? Or used to bribe somebody to drop the charges ? StuRat (talk) 17:00, 2 May 2014 (UTC)