Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 194: Line 194:


The etymology of the name is slightly misleading:
The etymology of the name is slightly misleading:
"The name Baunach comes from the Indo-Germanic word for river: bunahu"
"The name Baunach comes from the Indo-Germanic word for river: bunahu".
This suggests wrongly that the whole word "bunahu" means river.
This suggests wrongly that the whole word "bunahu" means river.
The following sentence tries to clarify that but sounds more like a contradiction,
The following sentence tries to clarify that but sounds more like a contradiction,

Revision as of 06:26, 4 September 2013

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconGermany Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.


Anyone know what the status of this award is? The awards were cancelled in 2011 because of the reaction to Putin being named a recipient but it also appears that no awards were made in 2012 -- is the Quadriga Award done? I looked at the official website, but it mentions nothing beyond 2010. Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 08:52, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for help citing the following

Hi,

I am working towards overall improvements to the Treaty of Versailles article. The following is from the territorial changes section. I have not been able to find any information that backs it up, yet it does not seem prudent to just delete it since it does add some background context. Can anyone confirm if the overall points are correct and at the same time provide some inline citations to support the paragraph?

"Germany′s borders in 1919 had been established nearly 50 years earlier, at the country′s official establishment in 1871. Territory and cities in the region had changed hands repeatedly for centuries, including at various times being owned by the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Kingdom of Sweden, Kingdom of Poland, and Kingdom of Lithuania. However, Germany laid claim to lands and cities that it viewed as historically "Germanic" centuries before Germany′s establishment as a country in 1871. Other countries disputed Germany′s claim to this territory. In the peace treaty, Germany agreed to return disputed lands and cities to various countries."

Regards, EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:48, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the paragraph has to give just a general idea of the historical situation in Central Europe, serving as an introduction to the rest of the section which provides the details. In this case individual countries need not to be mentioned, or maybe just Denmark, France and Poland as major examples of territorial disputes (I am not aware of any German-Swedish dispute, by the way). Regards TheaKantorska (talk) 12:16, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nazi medals images up for deletion

have been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:53, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Translate and transwiki to the English Language Wikipedia help request

Would someone who can translate German better than I can kindly translate/transwiki to the English wikipedia: Johann Wolfgang Jaeger and Jeremias Friedrich Reuss. Both men are significant intellectuals in 1600s/1700s Germany and have an academic genealogical influence on such major academics as Hegel. Thanks for your help! --24.112.187.219 (talk) 20:12, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I translated Johann Wolfgang Jäger for you today. It will take a little while to be approved and then you can check it out! I will try to get to the second article as well. Whitnokos (talk) 03:00, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wadan Yards

German wikipedia has an article about the company [1] that had most of its activity in Germany. "Wadan Yards was a company (headquartered in Oslo) that owned shipyards in Germany and Ukraina: Wadan Yards MTW Wismar, Wadan Yards Warnow GmbH and Wadan Yards Okean OJSC." What more text does one need to make a stub? --Herligatje (talk) 07:48, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone just check that this undiscussed move is reasonable please. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:54, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since Baden-Württemberg has only existed for around 60 years, whereas the individual states of Baden and Württemberg existed for several centuries, it would seem to make sense to split this into 3 articles - History of Baden, History of Württemberg and History of Baden-Württemberg - with the last-named covering just the period of its existence. Each article should, naturally, refer to the others. All would be long enough to justify separate articles anyway. --Bermicourt (talk) 15:29, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A division would certainly be in line with the articles on Schleswig-Holstein and North Rhine-Westphalia, two other fairly clear-cut post-war mergers with a double name. TheaKantorska (talk) 11:01, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Guðrún

The usage of Guðrún/Gudrun is under discussion, see talk:Guðrún -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 00:30, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help with an article?

Hi! I need some help with an article, Agnes (novel). I've managed to find enough sources to where I think it's fairly safe from deletion but the bigger issue is that I barely speak a lick of the language. I did take some classes during high school, but that was a while ago and most of it was of the "where is the bathroom, can you direct me there" variety. Is anyone interested in working on this article? The book looks like it's somewhat important as far as German language books go. There are already sources on the article to work with, but my problem is that the wording was so advanced that I could barely make out what was being said. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:20, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New aerial pictures of Hamburg

During a Photo project "Hot air balloon ride" in Hamburg in June 2013 a group of photographers toook about [[:Commons:Category:Projekt Heißluftballon|2,000 aerial pictures of Hamburg] that can now be used to illustrate articles about historical buildings and other landmarks, oil processing companies and harbours installations etc in Hamburg.

Additonally a list of missing articles that could be well illustrated was started.

Maybe some people would like to use images in enWP, or to write, or import and translate articles. Best --Martina Nolte Disk. 09:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interkosmos patch for GDR Cosmonauts.svg

image:Interkosmos patch for GDR Cosmonauts.svg is being discussed at NFCR, see WP:NFCR -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Desperately in need of help on Tempodrom

I have done a huge overhaul of this article, which was badly copied from the German WP and several other sources, and hopefully it is much improved. I need plenty of help, though, in covering its political and financial problems. Much of this would appear to source to Der Spiegel and the Berlin newspapers, and while I can sort of handle the latter I simply cannot put together a comprehensive picture of the the various scandals and management turnovers from reading week-to-week blow-by-blow coverage. If someone who knows the situation could come and help flesh that section out and ensure that it is well-cited, I would be most grateful. I could also use help with better coverage of its departure from the Tiergarten; I get the picture of what happened, mostly, but it needs citation. Seyasirt (talk) 00:07, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some basic fixes to the article, like removed the gallery and replaced it with a link to commons instead. I have also added a reference section so the inline citations show up. As to the scandals and management changes I know nothing about but I wouldn't go into to much detail, the Berlin newspapers and Der Spiegel take care of that, I'm sure. Calistemon (talk) 04:27, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying to mangle the article de:Felix Auerbach into English, using a mixture of machine translation and distant memories of learning elementary German a long time ago. I've made quite a lot of progress, and ironed out quite a lot of the article, but these two excerpts have stumped both me and the machines:

1889 übernahm Auerbach die von Ernst Abbe eingerichtete Professur für theoretische Physik an der Universität Jena. Als Jude wurde ihm eine ordentliche Professur zunächst verwehrt, erst 1923 wurde sie ihm doch noch eingerichtet.
Horst Bredekamp bezog sich in der ZEIT darauf, dass der Kunsthistoriker Ulrich Müller schrieb, dass der Jenaer Physikprofessor Felix Auerbach „in zwei Schriften der Jahre 1906 und 1921 Einsteins Relativitätstheorie zu erläutern verstand und insbesondere eine Reihe von Künstlern beeindruckte, weil er sich über Jahrzehnte mit einer Physik der Künste beschäftigte.“

Can anyone help?

-- The Anome (talk) 15:55, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

These are typically tortuous German sentences! The nearest I can get is something like this:
"In 1889 Auerbach took over the professorship of theoretical physics at the University of Jena which had been established by Ernst Abbe. As a Jew he was initially refused a formal professorship; it was not until 1923 that this was granted to him."
"Horst Bredekamp made mention in Der Zeit that art historian, Ulrich Müller, had written that the Jena Professor of Physics, Felix Auerbach 'was able to explain Einstein's Theory of Relativity in two papers, dated 1906 and 1921, and in particular impressed a number of artists because he had dealt with a physics of the arts for decades.'"
I hope that makes sense, but happy for those more expert to confirm or amend. --Bermicourt (talk) 17:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've carried out an initial cleanup of the article but not added in the second sentence above. Hope that helps anyway. Bermicourt (talk) 17:34, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2 euro coin from 2007 reverse.jpg

image:2 euro coin from 2007 reverse.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 06:04, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It has been moved to commons -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:51, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,
Please note that Henry Kissinger, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by Theo's Little Bot at 00:08, 5 August 2013 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team[reply]

I got a little involved in this article, addressing POV issues following an AfD discussion. There have been renewed (but non-specific) allegations of bias, so I thought it might be a good idea if some more people looked at it, especially in view of the upcoming elections in Germany. In May, there was also some feedback, suggesting that it had a UK perspective. Someone might also consider assessing the individual B-class criteria on the project banner. --Boson (talk) 18:01, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

German/Austrian station naming

There has been an issue raging for some time over the naming of German and Austrian central or main stations aka Hauptbahnhöfe. Essentially the debate is over whether we use the English name "Foo Central Station" or leave the article title in German i.e. Foo Hauptbahnhof. The truth is there are arguments both ways, but the debate has polarized opinion and is leading to inconsistency as we change titles based on our own perspectives. I will try to summarize the essentials in an objective a way as possible:

  • Many English sources use Foo Hauptbahnhof alone
  • Many English sources use Foo Hauptbahnhof and an English translation – either may be in brackets
  • Many English sources use "Foo Central Station".
  • Quite a number of English sources use "Foo Main Station", for certain stations this is even the most common name used.
  • The national railways of Germany and Austria use "Foo Central Station" and Foo Hauptbahnhof (and sometimes both) in English publications and web pages
  • Depending on which side of the debate editors lie, "Foo central station" and "Foo main station" may or may not be counted. Those "against" argue these are descriptive, those "for" argue they are proper names.
  • Leading and specialist dictionaries recognise that Hauptbahnhof can mean "central station" or "main station". Some editors vehemently oppose the former term (see Talk:Central station).
  • There is confusion because "central station" could mean geographically central to the city or operationally central to the railway network.
  • In reality the most common name in English sources varies from station to station. It may be Foo Hauptbahnhof "Foo Central Station" or "Foo Main Station".
  • For some stations there are few English sources.
  • For others, especially the big stations, there are thousands of online English sources.
  • There have been at least 4 heated discussions on talk pages to change names. Of these 3 have supported "Foo Central Station" (Nuremberg, Leipzig and Berlin I).
  • Following the latest debate, Berlin Central Station was moved to Berlin Hauptbahnhof. There is a proposal to do a mass move back to Foo Hauptbahnhof, possibly following a short RM discussion based on the top few.
  • Meanwhile sporadic moves continue.
  • Current Wiki practice for ordinary stations is to translate Bahnhof Foo as "Foo station" or "Foo railway station"

I’m not aiming to spark yet another argument over the merits of the different names or to debate the above, which is only intended to indicate the complexities and the need to do some research before forming an opinion. I am really seeking views on the best way forward.

The whole subject is crying out for a proper review of English-language sources. I feel that is best led by WP:WikiProject Trains, with the support of WP:WikiProject Germany and WP:WikiProject Austria. It may also make sense to avoid wasting everyone’s time, that no more moves take place until this is sorted out. Ultimately I don’t mind which way this goes as long as it is based on sources not POV, that there is some consistency amongst articles and that article text recognizes all significant usage, both English and German usage. Bermicourt (talk) 19:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Multi RM

As discussed by among others User:Wheeltapper and User:Bahnfrend at Talk:Central station, the multi-RM for 121 stations is at Talk:Kaiserslautern Central Station. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:15, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Cornflower" has been proposed to be renamed, see talk:Cornflower -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 23:44, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dialects

The article German dialects has been tagged for lacking refs since last year. Seems a rather serious gap, unless it's better off merged into something else. — kwami (talk) 07:59, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Countries bordering the Baltic Sea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help with an article?

Hey guys, I need some help with an article. The article in question is German Pellets, and as the name suggests it's a German company and most of the sources are in German. I can do a little with Google Translate, but the phrases are pretty advanced and come across a little jumbled with GT even more than usual. Can someone help look for sources and flesh out the article accordingly? I've found a few, one of which mentions a potential court case, but since I don't really understand the full extent of the article I'm hesitant to add any litigation, pending or otherwise. Thanks! Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 09:50, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's this all about? We have an article on Cologne, this seems to be a fork from that article although Cologne has no links to it, nor is there a link to it in Cologne. History of Cologne has a link but doesn't really discuss it. Dougweller (talk) 16:14, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning article on Baunach

The etymology of the name is slightly misleading: "The name Baunach comes from the Indo-Germanic word for river: bunahu". This suggests wrongly that the whole word "bunahu" means river. The following sentence tries to clarify that but sounds more like a contradiction, and it is not clear what the "This" refers to.

I would translate "bunahu" as "swelling river".

The section "Constituent communities" is even more confusing. It starts with the words "Baunach’s main town and namesake centre". However in the first line of the article Baunach is introduced as " a town". How can a town have a "main town"? This needs to be clarified.

Even more confusingly the name "Baunach" appears again among the "Gemarkungen" two paragraphs later. Is that the same Baunach as the town above?

It is important to differentiate between the administrative unit "Baunach", which consists of different districts, one of which has the character of a town, whereas others are just small villages, farms or even uninhabited.

80.226.24.8 (talk) 06:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC) Michael Mechthold-Jin[reply]