Talk:Adolf Hitler: Difference between revisions
m Undid revision 158281396 by 74.122.40.143 (talk) |
No edit summary |
||
Line 238: | Line 238: | ||
It's not like it's a fake picture. that is what hitler looked like, deal with it. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/207.255.7.143|207.255.7.143]] ([[User talk:207.255.7.143|talk]]) 06:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
It's not like it's a fake picture. that is what hitler looked like, deal with it. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/207.255.7.143|207.255.7.143]] ([[User talk:207.255.7.143|talk]]) 06:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
Put back the old picture: Adolf_Hitler_cph_3a48970.jpg |
|||
I liked it more. |
|||
== Vandalism == |
== Vandalism == |
Revision as of 00:21, 17 September 2007
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Adolf Hitler article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65 |
![]() | Adolf Hitler is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
Template:WikiProject Totalitarianism |
|
![]() Archives | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
opinions about aryals
i read that hitler though aryal people was: tall,blonde,had blue eyes and were beatifull. I see that ironic since he was Short,had black hair,brown eyes were incredible ugly and had the ugliest moustach in the world history. Wasn't he counting himself as a arial? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrsteam (talk • contribs) 14:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- He was definitely not an arial, but he had several blackletter tendencies, with a hint of garamond in his ancestry. But that was hidden from the German people. Paul B 14:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok,,it isnt aryal, its aryan, or aryan people, or the aryan race...and he was of average hight, 5"9, the russian autopsy said 5"5, but many think it says that so Joe Stalin wouldnt feel bad..by his clothing and pictures of him next to other people his hight can be judged to be around 5"9,,,he did have black hair,,but his eyes where actually blue..though that is hard to tell in most pictures because they are black and white..and as for being ugly...i would say he was an average looking guy in apperence...but he did have a pretty big nose which he was self consicious about...felt it looked "jewish" but yeah..so...learn the word aryan before you commment though...
WWII subsection headers
At the moment, the WWII section has 3 subheadings:
- 5 World War II
- 5.1 Opening moves
- 5.2 Path to defeat
- 5.3 Defeat and death
Which IMO don't reflect accurately the progression of the war - it makes it sound as if after the 'Opening moves' everything rapidly went wrong, when in fact the Nazis gained control of most of northern Europe. For the first 2 1/2 years the war looked to be going Hitler's way. Shouldn't the middle one be something like 'High tide' or 'Rapid advances'? (Can anyone think of anything better?) Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 13:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
What about something along the lines of "Progression"-- the text can say that things seemed to be going his way, the title doesn't have to.--Gloriamarie 15:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Hitler's nephew
The article says: "The copyright of Mein Kampf in Europe is claimed by the Free State of Bavaria and will expire in 2015. Reproductions in Germany are authorized only for scholarly purposes and in heavily commented form. The situation is however unclear; Werner Maser comments that intellectual property cannot be confiscated and so, it still would lie in the hands of Hitler's nephew, who, however, does not want to have anything to do with Hitler's legacy." --- Hitler's nephew died in 1987, and at this time I believe he only has two living great-nephews, who have no children. How old is this source? Is it referring to the deceased William Patrick Hitler, in which case the point would be moot and should not be included, or to William's sons?--Gloriamarie 18:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- According to Hitler's will, his intellectual property (and everything else of value) went to the Nazi Party, or, if that didn't exist, to "the State". So, even if the property were not confiscated, it could be argued that the IP rights still wouldn't belong to Hitler's relations, but to his beneficiaries. DrKiernan 07:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Wrong
I hope whoever referenced Hitler as the "Ultimate PWNDER" will stop changing difference pages that mention Hitler. It's just silly, and makes light of a very serious discussiong. Thank you. 606-2-610
Hitlers private movies dubbed using a makeshift voice
Pretty cool to see, a deaf man using his computer read Hitlers lips and added a voice. http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=189608705425991617&q=Hitler+Speaks&total=147&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0 Might be able to write about that.
- I've watched that 100 times, it's some of the best use of technology I've seen. Not sure how to include it though, but it certainly shows there was a private gentleman behind the Führer --Ulrich Friedrich Wilhelm Joachim von Rippentrop 21:46, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Blondi
There's a part that reads "Hitler also had his dog Blondi poisoned before his suicide to test the poison he and Eva Braun were going to take." And on Blondi's page, it says it's a myth. One or the other has to be changed to keep consistency. Does anyone have reference(s) to verify it? Polarrrbear 20:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
See Also
In the 'see also' section, the first item is 'list of coupled cousins'. That is ridiculous. Of all the many articles relating to Hitler and his deeds, that list is surely not one of the most important; the reader gains nothing by it. Moreover, the nature of his relationship with his cousin is ultimately speculative, as the article on Hitler as well as the article on his cousin state clearly. I cannot edit the article, but surely to God that link should be removed?!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.243.255.61 (talk) 08:42, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
Photo caption
The Hitler photograph with caption Adolf Hitler, accompanied by other German officials, grimly inspects bomb damage in a German city in 1944 is incorrect as to date and event. On the morning of September 1, 1939, Hitler announced to the Reichstag that Germany was at war with Poland. At the end of his speech he stated: “I have once more put on that coat that was the most sacred and dear to me. I will not take it off again until victory is secured, or I will not survive the outcome.” Hitler had discarded his customary brown party jacket and swastika armband for a field-gray uniform blouse resembling that of an officer of the Waffen-SS [without rank insignia]. (George H. Stein. The Waffen-SS, Hitler’s Elite Guard at War 1939-1945. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. 1966, p. 26). Thus, photograph blurbs or film clip narratives claiming to identify some wartime event with a party-jacketed Führer with swastika armband, are clearly in error.--Gamahler 02:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I recall reading somewhere that Hitler never visited a bombed city. Do you know where the photo was from? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 02:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- The caption is taken from the same source as the photo, the US National Archives:[1]. (The link is on the image page). Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 08:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- And just because he said he was going to wear the uniform of the Waffen-SS until victory or death doesn't mean he actually did. Parsecboy 12:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Nor does it mean he ever intended it to be taken literally. Are we to suppose he slept in it? It's just an image about never abandoning his military duties. Paul B 13:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- And just because he said he was going to wear the uniform of the Waffen-SS until victory or death doesn't mean he actually did. Parsecboy 12:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Exactly. Parsecboy 15:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- National Archives and "captured" materials? What can I say? The Feds have been wrong in the past, they are wrong now, and will be wrong again in the future.--Gamahler 19:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- They're wrong because Hitler made some statement in 1939 meant to whip up public support? Are you serious? How about this picture of Adolf with Mussolini, in occupied Yugoslavia? Yup, Nazi armband there. Parsecboy 19:24, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I try to be serious. It’s Adolf and Benito alright; I happen to think that location and year are incorrect. Why don’t we leave it at that?--Gamahler 21:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Birth day is wrong
Its april 20 not april 30!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.152.115.67 (talk) 10:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Would somebody please change it. Its april 20 not april 30!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.152.115.67 (talk) 21:18, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Two Hitler-Mannerheim photos?
Marshal of Finland C G Mannerheim meet Hitler once the 4th june 1942. The meeting was resultless and had no political effect what so ever. Mannerheim did not conference with Hitler at his Hq but at in his railwagon. Mannerheim was no Nazi, No allied of nazi germany, he was cobligrent aka figthing the same enemy. Mannerheim personal view of germans was not the best especially because he him self served as a officer during WWI in the Tsar russian army. 2 Mannerhime picture in the Hitler artical i clearlly one too much, or mayby two tomuch. --Posse72 18:53, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Hitler
Im not quite sure because i havent read this artical.. but have you said anything about his privite life? because i know someone who was hitler's grand son and aparently he was really lovely.. do u think maybe.. that his intentions were good? he just had a diffeent point of view.. and even if he was mentally insane dont u think insted of killing him u could possibly take care of him in a mental facility? we couldve have used his inalect for other uses? death should be for no-one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SebZy6193 (talk • contribs) 10:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- He just had a different point a view? Are you serious?--CyberGhostface 15:30, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Besides the Jewish genocide, what is misplaced in the military/political ambitions of Hitler? Free4It 20:19, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Black and white thinking: Absolute Power
History has shown him to be evil, however there is very little on the many things he did to aquire 'power' in Germany, things that by many people's accounts would be considered 'good'.
There was a TV documentary, that highlighted the great immoral debachery that was going on in Germany prior to his return to power; this allowed him to gain popularity by the masses who saw special interst groups corrupting the country.
Does this article highlight this, or is it politically incorrect to mention this ? Same with Musolino ?
I will like to see how history ties President Bush to the invasion of Iraq, and 9-11 and Bin Ladin...? The logic escapes me....I note a similar series of events, ie the religious right, and traditional family values being used to empower an individual. Once empowered the rest is up to him or her, under a system that is not democratic. (although it says it is...)
--Caesar J. B. Squitti : Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti 02:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Newest picture
Was there any real need to select a picture that looked so... heroic? I understand Wikipedia have become very serious about avoiding fair use, but surely there is a picture that doesn't paint him in such a noble light. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.110.246.116 (talk) 20:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry no pictures of him urinating at the nearest outdoor neighbourhood outlet. Hey, let's do away with portraits of Napoleon that bear a likeness contrary to how we believe evil should be seen. Alright, now go out there and get a grip [of your Nikon].70.49.133.11 21:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, the level of darkness can seem a bit sinsiter while still showing detail IMPO. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 22:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
It's not like it's a fake picture. that is what hitler looked like, deal with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.255.7.143 (talk) 06:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Put back the old picture: Adolf_Hitler_cph_3a48970.jpg I liked it more.
Vandalism
This page has been vandalized yet again! [2] The picture has also been changed to that of an adorable cat. And even though I love cats I have to say that these should be changed. Addie777 22:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Its already been removed, but feel free to remove the vandalism yourself next time. Aowpr 22:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)