Jump to content

Talk:Adolf Hitler

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pinky whity (talk | contribs) at 18:13, 22 December 2023 (→‎Hitler's dialect: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Good articleAdolf Hitler has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 26, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 19, 2005Good article nomineeListed
April 22, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
March 26, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
May 20, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
October 17, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
December 16, 2011Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article


Fuhrer, not “dictator”

His official title was Fuhrer, not “dictator”. “Dictator” is what his opponents label him, and not his official title. Let’s not be biased here. Rizzle685 (talk) 19:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that he chose not to call himself a dictator does not negate the fact that he was one, nor that most people/sources would refer to him as one. Moons of Io (talk) 19:21, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The lead starts with: “Adolf Hitler was an Austrian-born German politician who was the dictator of Germany from 1933 until his suicide in 1945”. The fact that he was a “dictator” is an opinion and not a fact. It should say Fuhrer, because that’s what his official title was. For example, if a Prime Minister acts like a dictator, he should still be called a Prime Minister, because that’s his official title. He wound not be the same as someone whose official title is “dictator” (such as Julius Caesar, for example). We should be factual and not biased. Rizzle685 (talk) 19:28, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The title is mentioned in the first paragraph. Mellk (talk) 19:30, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It should say: “Adolf Hitler was an Austrian-born German politician who was the Chancellor of Germany from 1933 until his suicide in 1945”. Chancellor and Fuhrer (from 1934) were his official titles. We need to be factual. Rizzle685 (talk) 19:32, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Let’s not be biased" about Hitler. Hilarious...except it's not. Dictator is exactly what he was. Führer was the self-aggrandising title he gave himself. Read WP:FALSEBALANCE. DeCausa (talk) 19:38, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You’re still being biased and unfactual. Rizzle685 (talk) 19:39, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's an objective fact that he's a dictator, because he established himself in a position where he dictated how the state should be run. I don't see how that's biased at all. And it doesn't have to be his official title. For example, Joe Biden is said to be a "politician". Technically, some politicians would say "I'm not a politician", meaning that it could hypothetically be considered biased to call them that, but it's really not.
Hitler was a dictator. That's a fact, not an opinion. That's no more biased than it's biased to also use his official title, to the extent that might be construed as going by the authority of the office. Yakko Walter (talk) 00:21, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
According to the Oxford Dictionary, a ‘Führer’ is a tyrannical leader. A case could be made that you could define a dictator by the same parameters. That’s just my opinion on the matter, but I do respect your opinion that it is biased, which someone could also make a case for. Getsomehelp1962 (talk) 20:58, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Found the neo-Nazi. 69.221.136.233 (talk) 05:23, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the archives, this has been discussed an endless amount of times so I do not think consensus will develop for such a change. Mellk (talk) 19:39, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I second this, it is what he legally, not self-appointed, was. He was a dictator, but that is not an official title. Tableguy28 (talk) 21:08, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A "dictator" is defined by Brittanica as "a single person who possesses absolute political power within a country or territory." Hitler was exactly that, and has been indisputably defined by historians as such. The title that he gave himself serves no relevance to what he actually was, especially considering that his title of Fuhrer could most easily be defined in the same way. For example, Kim Jong Un is referred to throughout North Korea as Supreme Leader, but that does not make him any less of a dictator, especially given his actions. The reason the opening paragraph uses the word "dictator" is because not everyone who views this article is going to know what the word Fuhrer really means. By using "dictator," more people are more easily able to understand who Hitler really was. UnbearableIsBad (talk) 00:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, find one RS that does not say he was a dictator, as we can find a ton that calls him one. Slatersteven (talk) 10:43, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Führer" refers to his position as leader of the Nazi party, not to his position as leader of the nation. He used the "Führer" title long before he became a dictator. --Hob Gadling (talk) 11:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
While I wouldn't agree that "Führer" is the appropriate title to use in an encyclopedia, I do think using dictator here also cannot be defended.
If we look at articles of similar political figures (Mao, Stalin, Fidel Castro, Gaddafi), none of them are referred to as dictators in the first paragraphs. Only in sections discussing how different historians evaluate them the topic is brought up. This is how it should be. None of the examples ruled democratically, two rose to power through arguably more violence than Hitler. Yet, its not the job of an encyclopedia to label them, but to faithfully reproduce what discussions go on in the research community.
If for whatever reason it's decided that the article should keep referring to Hitler as dictator, then the articles for my examples given should be changed accordingly. The definition referenced by @UnbearableIsBad above certainly applies to them as well. If not, it's blatantly obvious political bias. Meistdichteralsdenker (talk) 22:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What's in other articles should be discussed on the talk pages of those articles and are not relevant to here or vice versa: WP:OTHERCONTENT - although I would note you are wrong about the Stalin article. Also, you have a cherry-picked those articles - see Mussolini, Pol Pot, Idi Amin etc. for example. In what world is there any legitimate alternative view to Hitler being labelled as a "dictator"? None. Hitler is the dictator par excellence. It's a universally accepted and and unchallenged view...except in the mind of apologists whose views have no place here or in any civilised discourse. DeCausa (talk) 23:02, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah well the reason I'm pointing out this inconsistency is that I was reading the Mao article and found it odd how overly "neutral" he is described so I came here as a reference point, found this discussion and am now playing devil's advocate for the sake of reaching a consistent treatment of such political figures on here. If you are all for labeling politicians whose status as dictators is universally accepted and an unchallenged view I expect I'll find you supporting me in the discussions that will inevitably spring up when I modify those articles lacking the label :) Meistdichteralsdenker (talk) 09:22, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
reaching a consistent treatment of such political figures - the consistency lies in basing articles on the balance of best sources for each figure, filtered through the same editorial process. I'm no expert on Mao, but it's possible that his need to exercise power through the CCP and other agencies, and the less visible power structures of PRC mean that sources place less emphasis on his 'absolute' power. Stalin wasn't initially a dictator, though he became one, which his article reflects. Castro, for many reasons, is much less commonly called a dictator by neutral sources than the others you mention. The "one size fits all" approach doesn't necessarily work. It would be very hard to find any source that didn't characterise Hitler as a dictator though. Pincrete (talk) 10:33, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can be biased against Hitler 2.30.180.216 (talk) 21:34, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But are we? Slatersteven (talk) 11:47, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler's dialect

Austrian German has got NOTHING to do with dialect! Hitler was from Braunau am Inn - the dialect there is Westmittelbairisch (as classified in science). Bavarian is spoken in almost all of Austria, minus Vorarlberg. With regard to dialect, there is nothing called :Austrian" - instead the dialects are named after the region where they are spoken. 45.65.90.136 (talk) 18:54, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@45.65.90.136 Yeah it's right guys Pinky whity (talk) 18:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler's German language 45.65.90.136 (talk) 18:57, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do you want us to say, he spoke German? Slatersteven (talk) 19:00, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite sure what text you are complaining about. The article says There he acquired the distinctive lower Bavarian dialect, rather than Austrian German, which marked his speech throughout his life. It doesn't say he spoke "Austrian" it says he spoke the Bavarian dialect. It also only refers to Bavarian as an actual dialect. Austrian German isn't referred to as a dialect - it links to our article on it which makes it clear that it is not a dialect but just a variety of Standard German. So, as far as I can see, the article is consistent with what you are saying. What am I missing? DeCausa (talk) 20:00, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 December 2023

Known as the most hated man in history for being a tyrannical dictator Hansserd (talk) 19:07, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 19:11, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]