Talk:Every Man Dies Alone

Novels C‑class Mid‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany C‑class Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Son vs Brother

In the novel it is her dead son that spurs the acts of civil disobedience, but in real life it was her dead brother. Green Cardamom (talk) 04:00, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 18 April 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn. George Ho (talk) 08:21, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Every Man Dies Alone → ? – In UK, the book is called Alone in Berlin. Both English titles are equally commonly used. Personally, I prefer using the original German title, Jeder stirbt für sich allein. However, if you prefer English title, per WP:DIVIDEDUSE, why not use Alone in Berlin instead? George Ho (talk) 19:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, not to be mean. But: "why not use Alone in Berlin instead?" Have you read WP:RETAIN? Or "I prefer using the original German title, Jeder stirbt für sich allein" - have you read WP:USEENGLISH? Oppose Red Slash 02:24, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as Every Man - the reasoning: book articles use the English title when a translation exists, unless it's better known by its original language (like Les Miserables). But this one isn't well known by the German title. The reason for Every Man vs Alone is because it was the first translation of the book and it was the title chosen by the publisher who made the translation (Melville House). In fact Melville was not happy that the UK affiliate changed the title to Alone in Berlin. All other things being equal I think we should stick with the title chosen by the publisher. -- GreenC 03:17, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Every Man Dies Alone is a perfectly good title in English, it is a very common translation title for the book, and is the accurate translation of the original German title. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:38, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Every Man Dies Alone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

EL removed

I have removed external links, because the review is a self-published site whose primary purpose appears to be a money site designed to encourage purchase through their Amazon.com affiliate banner on the left size page bar. I think it's a ELNO/#11. The insertion, - presumably through conflicting guideline ELMAYBE #4 - ends up making ways for any and all money sites featuring reflective comments/essay/review by Passerby Nobody under the auspices of someone who says "its useful". Graywalls (talk) 15:54, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Of the nearly 2 million Google Books links on Enwiki, almost 80% contain a link to purchase the book. Google is a commercial corporate business in business to make money, Google Books would not exist without the profit motive driven by the "buy this book" button of which Wikipedia is a major driving force to their bottom line. Complete review is a small 1-person critically acclaimed literary website, he is an expert in foreign literature in translation. The "primary purpose" to encourage sales is nonsense. They have published sales figures and it wouldn't cover a food bill. The same would not be said for Google's revenues. Few things on Wikipedia are without some profit element at some level. A link to CNN drives online advertising. etc.. -- GreenC 19:36, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not originally published in West Germany

The novel's original 1948 publication was in East Germany's Aufbau-Verlag. His friend Johannes R. Becher, who aided Fallada in writing the novel by means of giving him the Gestapo files of the Hampel couple, was not simply "a poet", but by then was a high-ranking functionary of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany already (a member of both the Central Committee and the Party Executive Committee), from 1953-1956 served as president of East Germany's Akademie der Künste der DDR, and from 1954-1958 as Minister of Culture of East Germany. Also, the book's first translation was probably into Russian by the Soviets. As the article brushes upon but briefly, the book was indeed intended as an anti-Fascist work in a spirit that East Germany intended to associate itself and be associated with. Also, Fallada didn't write the book in autumn, but entirely in December 1946. --2003:DA:CF39:B821:C1A2:8CC6:CB0A:B1F4 (talk) 23:01, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]