Talk:Angela Merkel

Der Spiegel

The following passage in her bio is biased in no subtle way against Ms. Merkel:

"According to an article in Der Spiegel, her background in the former GDR has served her well in post-reunification politics. For the first 36 years of her life, she honed her skills at disguising her inner thoughts and feelings — essential for survival in a society where every room might contain a State Security Police (Stasi) informer, and especially for a pastor's daughter. Speaking near-perfect English and remarking on her background as an "Ossi", she says: "Anyone who really has something to say doesn't need make-up.""

The entry cites Der Spiegel's analysis of how Mr. Merkel learned in the DDR to hide her true thoughts. Then it quotes her saying in English that she puts up no front. The clear implication is that she is self-conscious of her consumate skill in playing to whatever crowd needs played to. This may be accurate. Problem is that it's POV and there's no evidence presented.

Here is a quote from the English version of Der Spiegel:

There was her gaffe, made twice in rapid succession, in which she seems to have confused the gross and net incomes of workers, which may not be terribly serious in itself, but was awkward for someone whose main claim to electability is her supposed mastery of Germany's sad economic picture.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,369265,00.html

The German version of Der Spiegel in a related story estimates that she may have lost up to 400,000 supporters from this gaffe. Nephron 18:46, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: make-up

I added the link to make-up 'cause German-speakers who venture on this page may not understand what it means. Nephron 18:51, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. Are you German or a native German speaker, BTW? --TJive 19:06, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

I'm more-or-less a native speaker -- I've worked in Germany on several occasions and don't have any trouble reading Der Spiegel. How about you? Nephron 18:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Nope; I've taken some classes before and did well but once you have no practical use for it, you don't remember your 'der' from your 'die' and so forth. --TJive 19:21, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

Political views?

The point of the Rose Monday parade in Duesseldorf reference is that Merkel's policy was very unpopular. To this day the CDU/CSU (vis-a-vis the SPD) are considered to lag far behind on foreign policy issues.[1] It is fair to say that the float is crude, but it did happen and it was a political commentary that saw a significant amount of press at the time and was effective at expressing the sentiment at that time. The picture was carried by Der Spiegel -- a German mainstream news magazine's website and other mainstream news outlets around the world. Removal of the reference is sensorship. Here is something similar from this year [2] -- if you look at the series of pictures (from the mainstream magazine Der Spiegel) you see Merkel looking up Bush's arse... not much different than the picture I linked to.

It is fact that current American policy, and the Invasion of Iraq in particular, are/were very unpopular in Germany. Why sensor creative popular dissent? Why erase mention of it? If you look at GW Bush's article there are plenty of references to books that laud him and trash him.

As for not encyclopaedic -- I think that argument is rather smug. Wikipedia isn't Encyclopedia Britannica if it has articles like this: Ogrish, Evil reptilian kitten-eater from another planet and Bang Bus. Nephron 05:50, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Dear Nephron, I agree and therefore re-established the Rose Monday parade link again in the "external Links " section with a note:political satire at Carnival Parades in Germany is an old and proud tradition (controversial "Merkel and Bush" Float)besides it also links "Der Spiegel"one of the most popular german current affairs Magazines with up to date high quality political news stories. Guss 02:40, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

The career of CDU leader Angela Merkel Part 1: East Germany—youth and political beginnings By Lena Sokoll 8 July 2005

This is the first of a two-part article on the political career of Angela Merkel, leader of Germany’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and chancellor candidate of the "Union"--the conservative bloc of the CDU and Christian Social Union--in the federal elections expected to take place this September. The concluding part was posted July 9.

The CDU recently named Angela Merkel as its candidate for chancellor in the federal elections expected this autumn. Merkel is often described as a “phenomenon” in German politics. Such a portrayal is partly based on her personal characteristics—she is a divorcee who has remarried, is childless, is a Protestant and is from East Germany—which are generally regarded as untypical and an obstacle to a career in this conservative party. On the other hand, she likes to present a public image of herself—ably enhanced by her political mentors—as someone who was a “nobody” before the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989—a blank page without political connections who has risen sensationally into the top ranks of German politics.

Merkel has undoubtedly enjoyed an unparalleled career since she became a CDU member 15 years ago, a rise to prominence that has also made her numerous enemies inside the party. Unlike almost all other leading CDU representatives, Merkel’s rise did not follow the usual path of decades of party work in the west German party organisation—the youth movement, local party groups and regional associations, slowly building up connections and getting noticed, being proposed for a CDU slate and winning a position. Instead, Merkel was fast-tracked into the party leadership, overtaking her time-served west German party colleagues, until finally she was named as the CDU candidate for chancellor.

Merkel, who was a physicist by profession, only joined a political party following the collapse of the Berlin Wall. However, her time in “Democratic Awakening” (DA) was brief. After four months, she became a spokeswoman for the East German CDU government under Lothar de Maizière. Following German reunification in 1990, Chancellor Helmut Kohl brought the 36-year-old Merkel, who had only been a CDU member for six months, into his cabinet. The 1998 defeat of the CDU in federal elections meant that Merkel lost her ministerial office, but the same year, she was appointed as CDU general secretary.

A year later, following revelations of a scandal concerning party donations, she actively sought the removal of the party’s honorary chairman and her former mentor, Helmut Kohl. In April 2000, she then assumed the party presidency. In the 2002 federal elections, she ceded the chancellor candidacy to Edmund Stoiber, leader of the CDU’s smaller sister party in Bavaria, the Christian Social Union (CSU). However, since then, she has consolidated her position inside the “Union” (CDU/CSU) and overshadowed her political competitors, leading to her unchallenged selection as chancellor candidate.

How is the rapid political rise of Angela Merkel to be explained? What where the qualities that enabled her to become a minister after only six month s’ party membership? The attempts of biographers and magazine columnists to explain her career as a matter of good luck, or due to personal characteristics such as assertiveness and an instinct for power are unconvincing because they ignore political and social interests and the conditions under which her ascent took place.

Merkel certainly did not enter politics after the fall of the Berlin Wall as a political novice. Through her father, she had access to influential circles inside the church, which in turn maintained close links with leading government figures in the former German Democratic Republic (GDR). Since the 1950s, the church had played a particularly important role in the GDR by ensuring that political opposition to the Stalinist regime was kept under control. In the period leading up to the collapse of the GDR, the church was central to keeping the mass protest wave that swept over the country in safe hands that eventually brought about the restoration of capitalism in East Germany and its Anschluss (annexation) by West Germany.

Her upbringing in GDR church circles

Born in Hamburg as Angela Dorothea Kasner, Merkel grew up as a pastor’s daughter in Templin, in East Germany. Following his theological studies in the West in 1954, her father Horst Kasner returned to East Germany, where he led the “Waldhof,” an evangelical education centre for ministers and priests, which also hosted a nursing home. This was well suited to establishing links with GDR church circles. At Waldhof, Merkel would have come to know Rainer Eppelmann, the later founder of Democratic Awakening, the organisation in which she launched her political career after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Merkel’s father ranked among those church representatives who argued for a policy that combined loyalty to the regime and the church, known as “the church in socialism.” In the early 1950s, the Stalinist leadership of the Socialist Unity Party (SED) had conducted a “struggle” against the influence of the church. However, following the anti-Stalinist uprising by East German workers in 1953, the Ulbricht government adopted a more conciliatory course, which sought to integrate church institutions into the state and utilise them as a means of stabilising SED rule. In particular, the “Weissenseer working group,” in which Horst Kasner participated, was the mechanism by which the Evangelical Church soon moved closer to the regime, and from 1971, officially defined itself as “the church in socialism,” thereby attaining a level of influence that was unparalleled throughout the Eastern Bloc.

The growing convergence of state and church, and the increasing economic and domestic political crisis inside the GDR, meant that the church not only played a key role in helping to stabilise the situation at home, but it was also involved in discrete diplomatic relations between the two German states. Since the early 1960s, the church had provided the mechanism for organising prisoner exchanges with the West, as well as facilitating substantial financial transfers. Later, this very important East-West political contact certainly helped GDR church circles secure a role in all-German politics.

Inside the GDR, the church and state maintained their own representatives to conduct negotiations and mediate conflicts between the two. In this, a prominent role was played by the high-ranking Evangelical Church functionary Manfred Stolpe, one of the political architects of “the church in socialism,” and by the Undersecretary of State for Church Affairs Klaus Gysi, father of Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS) leader Gregor Gysi. Under Klaus Gysi, the relationship between state and church was substantially consolidated, and the church was granted numerous privileges including church broadcasts in the media, state financial support and the building of new churches.

Other important intermediaries were legal attorneys, who represented the Christian groups in their dealings with the state. At the same time, many were also informers for the Stasi (Secret Police), including Lothar de Maizière and Wolfgang Schnur, who were not only active Christians and informants, but later Merkel’s first political mentors.

Growing up in such circles, Angela Kasner already enjoyed connections that she could later use to her advantage. In his authorised biography, Wolfgang Stock reports the fact that Merkel’s high school class had wanted to annoy their unpopular teacher by not preparing a contribution for the school’s mandatory cultural programme, instead giving an improvised presentation. The pupils were to be punished, but an intervention by the Kasners gave the whole thing a new twist: “A petition was written that Angela personally presented to Manfred Stolpe, the highest church attorney in the GDR.... Thanks to church involvement, ‘Berlin’ intervenes: Angela’s teacher is disciplined, ...the pupils are ‘only’ given a reprimand at ‘school assembly.’”

After graduating from high school, Angela Kasner studied physics, married and was accepted at the Berlin Academy of Sciences, where she attained a doctorate in 1986. While a student, she was secretary for agitation and propaganda in the FDJ, the East German youth organisation loyal to the SED regime, a position that she now tries to portray as merely that of a “cultural representative.”

A Stasi informer at the Institute who was primarily there to spy on the son of dissident Ulrich Havemann also provided information about his office colleague Merkel. In the reports of this Stasi source, there is no trace of the “internal resistance” to SED rule, which Merkel touts in her authorised biography and in interviews about her history. Stern magazine investigated the archives and found that an “unofficial” informant had “nothing politically explosive to report [about Merkel], quite the opposite, another time emphasising Angela’s ‘positive political views.’ Otherwise, he reports mainly about private and personal matters. Concerning her limited, cosseted life.”

Initially, Merkel seemed disinterested in the growing protest and resistance movement in the GDR in 1989. “Oh, just look at what is happening outside,” is how she is reported answering a colleague at the Institute who could not understand how someone could not be interested in attending a political meeting or demonstration at that time. Only after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the SED’s loss of power was inevitable did she begin to seek a new political orientation and go looking for a party.

Faced with mass protests against SED rule, the Evangelical Church and its representatives played a key role in preventing an open rebellion, channelling opposition along safe lines to ensure an orderly transfer of power from the thoroughly discredited regime. Under church moderation, the so-called “Round Table” was established to make the regime change possible without the working class being able to call to account the Stalinist thugs and establish its own independent organisations. The church called for non-violence and above all ensured the keeping of the social peace.

Thus it not only provided a last service to the SED, in the context of the long-established church-state collaboration, but also acted in the interests of the West German bourgeoisie and their political parties. The latter used their good contacts with representatives of the East German church to swiftly settle the fate of the GDR in favour of West German capitalism. Despite all the differences between the political leaders in East and West Germany, there was a fundamental view they both shared with the church: a profound antipathy to any independent popular movement based on their fears of an uncontrollable revolutionary development of the working class.

Church representatives or those with close links to the church were largely responsible for founding the new parties that emerged in the GDR in 1989. At the same time, those with church connections also came to the fore in the former state parties of the GDR as they sought to renew their leading personnel.

The beginnings of a political career

In December 1989, Angela Merkel joined Democratic Awakening, which had been founded by the clerics Rainer Eppelmann and Friedrich Schorlemmer, as well as Wolfgang Schnur, the trusted attorney of the Evangelical Church in the GDR. Two months later, she was promoted to press spokesperson for DA, which supported the rapid introduction of capitalism into East Germany and was politically aligned to the West German CDU.

In the GDR parliamentary elections of spring 1990, the DA participated on a joint slate with the East German CDU initiated by Helmut Kohl under the motto “Alliance for Germany.” The East German CDU had been largely discredited as one of the so-called “bloc parties” that had supported the Stalinist regime in East Berlin, and so the support of the DA was important to provide the appearance of a break with this old tradition.

The unmasking of Schnur as a long-time Stasi agent just prior to the election meant the DA only attained 0.9 percent of the vote. However, against expectations, its ally the East German CDU became the strongest party. Lothar de Maizière, the party leader, became prime minister of the last East German government, which regarded its most important task as facilitating the dissolution of the GDR state and unification with West Germany.

De Maizière was a long-standing member of the East German CDU, who had only taken on the party leadership shortly before the election. In the last SED-led government under Hans Modrow, the attorney de Maizière was minister for church affairs; he also enjoyed excellent contacts with the political elite in West Germany. His uncle Ulrich de Maizière was largely responsible for overseeing West German rearmament after the Second World War, also holding the highest military office as General Inspector of the Federal Armed Forces.

So it was probably more than a lucky coincidence that on the day of the East German elections, Merkel swiftly left the DA in order to participate in the celebration of the CDU. There she approached Thomas de Maizière, cousin to Lothar and son of Ulrich, and asked to be assigned a position in the new government. “You should count your luck that you have such fine people as us from ‘Democratic Awakening’ in the ‘Alliance for Germany,’ “ she told the representative of a family with influence in both east and west Germany. “I hope this will be taken into consideration when forming the government,” she said to Thomas, who himself later became a minister for the CDU in the Saxony state legislature. Lothar de Maizière, who also knew Merkel’s father, fulfilled her wish for high office and made her his government spokeswoman.

Democratic Awakening was dissolved in August 1990 into the East German CDU, which itself was dissolved into the West German party following German reunification in October of that year. Merkel’s job disappeared along with the GDR, but those few months were enough for her to develop and strengthen her contacts. She belonged to the close circle around Lothar de Maizière, along with Günther Krause, who as a parliamentary state secretary had negotiated the currency and economic union with West Germany. Recommendations from Krause and de Maizière brought an invitation to visit Kohl in his Bonn chancellery. As CDU regional chairman in Mecklenburg Western Pomerania, Krause provided Merkel with a safe seat in the first all-German elections to the Bundestag (Federal Parliament) in December 1990. (continued , click link below for part 2 of article)

The career of CDU leader Angela Merkel ,By Lena Sokoll 8 July 2005 (engl. version)

Die Karriere der Angela Merkel,von Lena Sokoll 8 July 2005 (deutsche version) ist auch auf der oberen URL zu finden. Guss 13:05, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

FACTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT

The CDU led by Angela Merkel and the CSU led by Edmund Stoiber are two seperately registered parties,both funded seperately by german Taxpayers. The Parties got following percentage of votes on 18 September 2005:

German parties are mainly funded by the number of votes they receive in elections. The fact that CDU and CSU are two parties is irelevant for the tax payer.

SPD Gerhard Schroeder 34.3%, Die Grünen The Green Party Joschka Fischer 8.1%, CDU Angela Merkel - 27% , CSU Edmund Stoiber 8.2%, PDS ( left) Oskar Lafontaine 8.7%, FDP Guido Westerwelle 9.8%, other minority parties 3.9%

CDU and CSU, while beeing two parties, run together. Merkel was the chancellor candidate of both parties. Thus, she won (even if only by a small margin) the election.

Elections in Dresden are still to be held on 2nd October due to the death of a Kandidat. Until all votes are in , the result of 2005 election are still only the unofficial election Results!

Guss 03:53, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Albanian NOT Jamaican Coalition

Jamaican Coalition would mean "black" "yellow" "green" whereas the two parties taking part in this coalition use the symbolic colors "black" and "red" thus forming an Albanian Coalition. (--> Albania's Flag) XXX

The "black" and "red" colition is called "Grand Coalition" and doesn't refer to any flag. The term "jamaican Coalition" was just invented at the day of the election 2005. It was also called "Schwampel". User: 216.250.175.252

The term Jamaica Coalition was invented 10 years ago, see de:Jamaika-Koalition#Geschichte der Bezeichnung. Gruß --MartinWill 19:19, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Just for information: "Schwampel" is derived from Schwarze Ampel, literally translated: Black traffic lights, meaning a variation of the traffic light coalition (red-yellow-green) exchanging "black" for "red". Str1977 21:13, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

She changed her name?

Why did she change her name from Kasner to Merkel? Her husband's name Sauer, was she married before? (Alphaboi867 03:08, 11 October 2005 (UTC))

Yes, in the late 70s, early 80s she was married to someone named Merkel.--Larsw 09:23, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

She was married to fellow physicist Ulrich Merkel from 1977 until 1982.

Merkel: first woman to lead Germany

Merkel is the first woman to lead Germany, not just the first woman chancellor. The article mentions Maria Theresia, however Empress Maria Theresia was never the ruler of Germany. Her husband, Franz I Stefan was. Salic law prevented a female from becoming the Holy Roman Emperor. As "Holy Roman Empress" she was merely the consort of the Holy Roman Empire with no power in that realm. However, she WAS the head of state of Austria, Hungary and Bohemia, and as such was the Queen regnant and ruler of Austria, Hungary, etc. but not "Germany", aka. the Holy Roman Empire of which she was merely the consort. Maria Theresia, while no doubt an important and influential female figure in the history of the German-speaking world, should not be mentioned here at all. see... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habsburg Bullproof9 21:10, 11 October 2005 138.220.73.157

The article originally said she was the first female leader since Theophano (Byzantine Empress), but it was changed to Marie Theresa yesterday:[3]

03:45, 12 October 2005 User: 172.188.173.178

I was the one to change the passage from Theophanu to Maria Theresia.

There are two ways we can go about this:

1) we can focus on the "nominal leadership" of Germany a.k.a. heads of state, or

In regard to Mrs Merkel:

2) we can focus on the "factual leadership" of Germany, i.e. who's really in power

If (1) then Merkel is not the first leader of Germany because she'd be not the leader at all. It'd be president Horst Köhler. And there'd be no woman in the past to qualify, since there never was a female ruler, be it Queen, Empress, President or whatever.

If (2) then Merkel is (or will be) leader of Germany. Then however Maria Theresia also qualifies, since she was the real power behind her husband, the Emperor who only ruled the Grandduchy of Tuscany which didn't even belong to the HRE at that time. True, the Emperor's (or Empress) power had been limited, more or less, to his own territories, but MT was nonetheless a figure of "national" importance.

(And please, could we avoid the usual Austrian-vs-German edit war here?)

Theophanu also qualifies as "leader", but then she'd have to defer to her mother-in-law Adelheid, who succeeded her as regent for Otto III, and to Agnes of Poitou, who was regent for her son Henry IV.

Hence I revert back to the "Maria Theresia version".

PS. Please sign your posts.

Str1977 15:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I had changed it to the Theophanu (note: NOT Theophano (Byzantine Empress)) version earlier today. I admit I didn't check the whole of the intermediate history, i.e. if there really were no other female regents. However, I don't think Maria Theresa should qualify: there was no "leader of Germany" at her time (under your definition (2)). The Holy Roman Emperor was no more "leader of Germany" at that time than the Federal President is today: it had become a powerless position.

Probably "first woman to lead Germany since ..." should be changed to "first woman to lead post-war Germany" or something like that, and this issue be discussed elsewhere and avoided here. Kusma 16:57, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

She is not only the first woman to lead German after the war, but also since the German state was established in 1871. So "first woman to lead Germany since it became a nation-state" would be better than "post-war". Miroslawa 21:17, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Ok guys, I stand by my "Maria Theresia" edit (she was hardly powerless), but the current version is also good. It is both correct and relevant (which the post war version wouldn't have been). Str1977 17:53, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

I apologize for not signing my original comment. (I'm new to this). I'm the one who first brought up this Maria Theresia issue. I'm okay with the current version, although I still disagree with the Maria Theresia as ruler of Germany. I have a feeling MT was a lot more influential in Austria than in Germany during her years as Empress/Queen/Archduchess. Certainly she was influential throughout much of Europe, marrying her daughters off to French and Italian monarchs. And I also agree that, certainly by 1780 something the Holy Roman Emperor was hardly a ruler in any respect...after all, the HRE fell apart 20 years later. --Bullproof9 15:01, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Sure, bullproof, it's allright. It's always difficult to draw comparisons when so many things have changed since then. Of course, MT was never officially the head of the HRE, as she was a woman and hence couldn't become Emperor (in contrast to Hungary where the diet elected her "King") - Emperors were her husband and her son. Both however were subject to MT when it came to real power. Francis independently ruled Tuscany and some land in his wife's territories and of course he was a great help to her, especially in ordering finances. And yes, the Emperor was bascically only a primus inter pares at that time (as since 1648 the princes were allowed to have their own foreign policies, as long as it wasn't directed against the HRE). Despite this, MT was a powerful woman in Germany (of course not as powerful as in Austria, where she was prince) and certainly the most powerful woman since and for a long time. Anyway, such comparisons are always difficult and the current wording in the end is better, as it covers not only a shorter time but also an entity that is basically the same. Str1977 21:22, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

As far as I can see, Merkel is the first female to lead germany at all. Even before 1871 there was no female political leader of Germany in whole. There were several female leaders of different german principalities, but there was never a female german leader (Queen, Empress) for the whole State, Federation, or Reich in her own rigth. Maria Theresia may have had a large amount of power, but she was neither head of government nor head of state. And Teophanu had to share her title as co-regent to her mother-in-law Adelheid and both had to rely on Arch-Chancellor and Reichsverweser Willigis, who was guardian for the child-king Otto III.. And speaking of the german President: he is Head of State, but has indeed no noteworthy political powers. He is merely a representant than a political leader. --mmg 00:38, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Is Merkel addressed as Frau Bundeskanzler, or as Frau Bundeskanzlerin? Eddieuny 18:04:32, 07 February 2006 (UTC)

Either are acceptable, though there has been much ado in the media about the novelty of "Bundeskanzlerin". Str1977 18:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Candidacy for Chancellor

I've changed four claims in one paragraph of this section, namely:

• The old page said that a grand coalition seemed unlikely: it seemed to everyone that I knew the likeliest outcome, since the FDP rules out joining a coalition with the Greens, and everyone rules out joining a coalition with Die Linke, given this the choice was a grand coalition or going back to the election. The main obstacle to the coalition was that each party wanted their candidate to be chancellor;
• The previous version said that 8 of 16 government posts went to the SPD: the reported deal said 8 of 14 ministerial appointments went to the SDP: there are many non-ministerial government appointments, including the chancellorship.
• The previous version talked about the the SPD having effective control of policy, which I have not seen reported, and would be absurd.
• The previous version speculated on Schroeder getting the Vice-Chancellorship: I put in the bit about his "victory or Viktoria" slogan as reason to think he might leave politics.

I'm not happy about the discussion of the coalition agreement as it stands, since it suggests there is a fixed number of posts to be divided up between the two parties. In fact, a number of new posts have been created, for instance the economics post will go to Stoiber, but will be stripped of its function of labor relations, which is a fresh post going to the SPD. But putting this all in goes beyond the scope of this article; if anyone has a good idea about how to make this more accurate without being too verbose, I will applaud. --- Charles Stewart 18:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

There are fourteen cabinet positions at the moment, including that of Chancellor. The number may change, but the deal seems to be (according to all media sources I can find) that the SPD gets the majority of them, and they've all indicated that the SPD will retain control of policy (that Merkel has had to drop neo-liberal policies that weren't already part of Schroeder's programme). The reports I've seen suggest Schroeder intends to retire (and may be going to work for Gazprom to over-see the new pipeline from Russia to Germany), but there's also been speculation that he could become Vice-Chancellor to calm opposition from SPD members to Merkel being Chancellor. I think trivia about Schroeder (the "victory or Viktoria" thing) belongs in his article and is probably just clutter in here. 03:41, 12 October 2005 User:172.188.173.178

The deal between the parties is that both sides will be evenly represented in the cabinet (which is important when voting on legislative initiatives). From what I heard there will be 16 cabinet members (Charles is right, the number is not fixed) including the Chancellor and the cabinet secretary (Kanzeramtsminister). Since these two posts will go to the Union, CDU and CSU will have fewer ministers in comparison to the SPD. In the case of 16, there will be 8 SPD ministers and 6 Union ministers. Together with the Chancellor and the Cabinet secretary that evens the score. If there'd be only fourteen posts, then the SPD would get 7 and the Union 5 + 2.

It is inconceivable that the Union would agree to be in the minority in the cabinet since they actually are slightly bigger in parliament.

How the equal share works out in regard to policies we will see and certainly the SPD will have their voices heard, but that they will retain control is an exageration: They used to have 11 of 14 cabinet posts before.

The Gazprom story is still only a rumour, and I haven't heard it lately.

He has announced yesterday and today again, that he will not be part of the new government.

And again, please sign your posts, using four tildes.

Str1977 16:01, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

The media is still reporting 14 (+1) posts, not 15 (+1) - and that the deal is for the SPD to have the majority of posts. The number is variable, but can you cite a source for Merkel's cabinet going back up to 16, in contrast to the sources currently linked in that paragrpah? It might seem inconceivable that the SPD would agree to be a minority given their slight majority in the Bundestag, but it seems to be what was necessary and it's no more bizarre than the SPD agreeing to Merkel replacing Schroder, given how popular Schroeder is compared to Merkel (significantly, polling shows he's much more popular than the SPD as a whole, whereas Merkel is less popular than the CDU as a whole). 172.188.58.133 00:45, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

The first paragraph of the quote from the FT that I posted on Talk:Cabinet of Germany makes clear that the CDU/CSU gets 6 portfolio positions plus two others. Will you rv your last edit? --- Charles Stewart 01:42, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Done - I found a free online source: [4] 172.201.91.166 14:02, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Goog, thanks. --- Charles Stewart 13:37, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Str1977's discussion of the makeup of the cabinet was useful to me. One point: isn't the Kanzleramtsministerium a cabinet ministry? The German page discussing the post calls it a de:Minister ohne Portefeuille, which in British politics is certainly a cabinet level ministry... I'm guessing the newspapers didn't count this post because it wasn't under discussion in the coalition negotations. This topic may be best treated on the German federal election, 2005 page; I've deleted the discussion of Schroeder from this article. --- Charles Stewart 17:00, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

The Director of the Chancellery is only a member of the Cabinet if he or she is also given a ministerial post (usually, as you say, as a Minister Without Portfolio - usually the title is Minister for Special Tasks - though one served as Minister of Defence). The current Director is not a member of Schroeder's Cabinet (he may attend Cabinet meetings, but does not vote). I haven't yet seen any reports saying the Director of the Chancellory will be included in Merkel's cabinet. 172.188.58.133 01:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

The FT article I excerpted in Talk:Cabinet of Germany says "In addition to the chancellery and the chancellery's chief of staff - a post that is being upgraded to a full cabinet portfolio - ...". I think this may be an unfortunate wording: surely the post doesn't carry a portfolio, but I understand it to mean that it is being made a cabinet position. --- Charles Stewart 13:41, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Polish Angela Merkel fan club

I found this on pl.wikipedia: http://angelamerkelclub.blogspot.com/

I don't understand, what they're saying, but great... --AchtungAchtung 22:31, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Can anybody explain why this attribution was removed?

I wrote

"According to an article in der Spiegel, her background in the former GDR has served her well in politics."

was changed into

"Her background in the former GDR has served her well in politics."

Please note that the Wikipedia guidelines prescribe that opinions, like these, have to be attributed. Clear undisputed facts, of course, do not have to be attributed. So unless a good reason is given, I will revert it and I request and hope that the person who removed this attribution will never again remove attributions in any article in Wikipedia. Thanks. Andries 12:45, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Merge Ulrich Merkel here

Since the one assertion made there is made here, I do not see the point of a merge process. Why not simply redirect? if some indepedent content inappropriate to this article is found, it is quite easy to turn the redirect into a now viable article. --- Charles Stewart 20:39, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

The current article Ulrich Merkel as it is now has no value and should either be deleted or re-directed here. Andries 21:24, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Interesting quote

"We will not capitulate - no, never! We may be destroyed, but if we are, we shall drag a country with us - a country in flames." - 2005 during election campaign

Can this quote be verified? It seems an odd sort of thing for an elected official to say in a democratic country, considering the quotation's rather nefarious origins. I know Merkel plagarized Ronald Reagan, but Adolf Hitler?

Very questionable quote, I think. And yes, Hitler made very similar statements. I could not find the quote on the German Wikipedia and German Wikiquote. I think that this quote can be removed now and can be re-inserted after references have been provided. Andries 21:45, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Rubbish... --Abe Lincoln 16:39, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Nonsense. If Merkel would have said things like this there would be a pretty great noise in a country, which has the german correctness.--84.61.127.30 12:18, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

I never heard about such a quote. Str1977 14:13, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Meaning of line

I deleted this line because it makes no sense to English readers: "Since 2002 she has served as Chairwoman of the CDU/CSU faction." Faction of what? If this line is to go in it needs an explanation. Adam 13:44, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Dear Adam, this refers to her serving as chairman of the "Fraktion" of CDU and CSU in the Bundestag. "Fraktion" is the name given to the different groupings in parliament, comprising the MPs from one party. This word is hard to translate and "faction" is not a fortunate wording. "Fraction" exists, but the dictionary says it's a term from chemistry. If you can think of a better English term, please post it.

I think the correct Ënglish translation here for "Fraktion" is simply "party". Andries 14:53, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Then it should be made clear that it's about the party in parliament, not about the party organisation as such (to which she has been chairwoman since 2000). Str1977 15:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

May be "chairwoman of the CDU/CSU Members of Parliament". I could not find a direct translation of the German word "Fraktion". Andries 15:13, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

The "Fraktion" is the group of the MPs. My Collins/PONS says "parliamentary (or US: congressional) party". Str1977 15:22, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

... um, how about "caucus"? Not strictly correct, but it gets the idea across. ～J.K. 08:12, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

What about "parliamentary group"? --86.193.162.134 13:11, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

I think, 86, that's the best solution. Str1977 18:11, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Conservative party

Dear Adam, the CDU (or the CSU) is not a strictly conservative party. After 1945, both parties (actually at first many local parties who then united in the different states and finally on the federal level with only the Bavarian part reaming distinct) were founded as a union (hence the name) of citizens from three different political movements: Political Catholicism (until 1933 organized in the Centre Party and the Bavarian People's Party), Conservatives and Liberals, all united under the "Christian view on man". The conservative element was later strengthened by the influx of smaller (conserative) parties, but the CDU remains a kind of a mixture. "Conservative" however is used by political opponents as a beating stick in campaigns. Hope that satisfies you, even if I can not easily give a alternative wording. Even "liberal-conservative" is not exact, but it's certainly better than just "conservative". Str1977 14:15, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Most conservative parties are coalitions of conservatives, liberals, neo-liberals etc etc. I don't think calling the CDU-CSU a conservative party is either inaccurate or pejorative. In the German political spectrum there is clearly a social-democratic party (SPD), a liberal party (FDP) and two left parties (Greens and PDS). That only leaves "conservative" as a general label. But I am not going to argue the point. Adam 00:43, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Adam, don't forget that there are also smaller parties to the right of the CDU, some of which could be termed conservative (though some of the early conservative parties were merged into the CDU in the 50s). And "conservative" is not a label we have to use because no other big party fits it. Str1977 10:05, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

The parties to the right of the CDU (the NPD and the Republicans) are extreme right parties, not conservatives. If the CDU-CSU is not a mainstream conservative party, what is it? Adam 12:41, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree that conservative is an appropriate label for the CDU/CSU. There are no parties of influence to the right of the Union. please sign your posts 10:20, 21 November 2005

Guys, you two are mixing up two different classifications - 1) the left-right classification and 2) the classification according to political ideology.

1) IMHO the left-right divide is not really useful nowadays, especially when these epithets are used across cultural borders (as here with a German party portrayed in an English-speaking Encyclopedia). But anyway, the CDU describes itself as a party stretching from the centre to the right. Just because there are no parties of influence to the right of here (as in the FJ Strauß quote: "right of me is the wall"), doesn't mean that the CDU is a right-wing party. The right wing was shattered by the events of the Third Reich and has never recovered. Also, in the Bundestag, the FDP's seats are right of the CDU's, as the FDP originally was located right of the CDU.

2) the classification according to ideology is much more useful (though cultural misunderstanding may occur too). The CDU is the political home of mainstream conservatism, but the party itself is not solely conservative, as I have explained above. But I wouldn't object if you termed it "liberal-conservative", though that glosses over the heritage of "political catholicism" and the social wing of the party.

As for the smaller parties you mentioned: both NDP and Reps are right-wing parties - the NDP is not a conservative party but, in the end, a Neo-Nazi Party. The Reps however are a national-conservative party, not so much unlike the former Deutsche Partei, especially outside of their base Lower Saxony. The Reps are a break-away from the CSU after all. Str1977 17:03, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Start and Cabinet

Someone keeps removing mention of Angela Merkel being from the former East Germany from the start of this article. It is extremely notable that she is the first Chancellor from the former East Germany and I think the removal of this from the article is prejudiced agaist East Germans. The same person also keeps moving Tomas de Maizière up to second in the Cabinet list. His office is the most junior in the Cabinet, listing him second would be like listing the White House Chief of Staff ahead of the Vice President in a list of the American Cabinet or a Minister Without Portfolio ahead of the Deputy Prime Minister for the British Cabinet. Does anyone else have opinion on these things? User:195.92.67.69 14:59, 22 November 2005

The obsession for her having lived in the GDR does not belong in the introduction. Where she has lived is explained in the first section. Secondly, calling her the first "East German" chancellor is misleading, there have certainly been East German chancellors before (like Michaelis). Thirdly, the colloquialism "East German" for the GDR is POV and should not be used at all. As for Maizière, he is holding a key position in the government and should be mentioned after the Chancellor, as the Chief of the Chancellery (or at least after the Vice Chancellor, as the French Wikipedia does). User:83.109.163.204 15:22, 22 November 2005

Before you start an edit war, could you both please get into the habit of signing your posts, using 4 tildes (~).

Now, I agree, 83, that the fact that she's the first East German chancellor of the BRD needn't be mentioned in the introduction, but mentioning that she's from East Germany is valid. (And East German is in no way a POV term, unless you for those you consider East Germany a term for Silesia, Pommerania and East Prussia, now parts of Poland - East Germany is a fairly common term for the former territory of the DDR).

However, I agree with 195, that putting de Maiziere in the second spot causes problems, as he is certainly not number 2 of the government. On the other hand, he is the assistant of the Chancellor, so putting him next to her, can be justified. How about letting him stay next to her, but using two asteriks to indicate his secondary status, like this:

• Angela Merkel (CDU) — Chancellor
  • Thomas de Maizière (CDU) — Minister for Special Affairs and Chief of the Chancellery
• Franz Müntefering (SPD) — Vice Chancellor and Minister for Labour and Social Affairs

Merely a suggestion, any views? Str1977 17:03, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

I like your proposal for Thomas de Maizière. As for the rest: The claim that she is "East German" is very problematic. She is originally from Hamburg and I don't think her family has particularly eastern roots. The term "East Germany" is officially not wanted in Germany when referring to ex-GDR and should thus be avoided. Instead the official term (German Democratic Republic) should be used. Making a difference between Germans based on which part of the country they lived in during the cold war is anachronistic and it suggests they are two different peoples. Her background from the GDR is relevant, but it is history and background and not Gegenwart. It is not something which can define her today. When her background from communist GDR is mentioned just after, I don't think this part of history needs to be in the introduction. --83 19:32, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

This is typical of trying to erase East Germany from history and pretend the differences, particularly the problems that East Germany faces that West Germany does not have, do not exist. That Merkel is from the East is at least as notable as the fact that she is a woman. East germans have been excluded from public life in Germany since reunification and this shows that is starting to change. As for Maizière, creating second bullet points seems pointless and inappropriate. He should be at the bottom of the list, where the Director of the Federal Chancellery, Bodo Hombach, is in the list of Schröder's first Cabinet. Hombach's three predecessors who were members of Kohl's Cabinet (Wolfgang Schäuble, Rudolf Seiters, Friedrich Bohl) are also at the bottom of the lists of Kohl's Cabinets, above only two junior positions that were created for spoecific functions that no longer exist. If Maizière is listed second in this list, then these four men must similarly be listed second in the relevant Cabinet lists for Kohl and Schröder. 195.92.67.77 11:22, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with everbody here who says that Angela Merkel's East German past is worth while mentioning. I'm sure many East Germans would agree. As a 'Wessi' I am extremely pleased that an East German woman made it as our Chancellor (although I'm far from being a partisan of the CDU/CSU). For me it's a token of sanity of our current political and social system. Imagine a French President coming from a muslim family. Hold it, I don't want to compare muslims and East Germans. The only (complicated) comparison lies in the fact that it is French policy to seemingly ignore origin (or religion) in order to make believe that every Frenchman has the same rights (you know, 'Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité'). Arguably, it only serves to mask existing discriminations. So, let's not do the same to the 'Ossis'. --wpopp 13:29, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

• If having an Easterner is Chancellor is such a big deal, why didn't the East vote for her? They still voted overwhelmingly SPD or PDS, and her own constituency vote actually went down.
• Is this Maizière related to the last DDR Prime Minister of the same name, the one who was a music professor?

Adam 13:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

• • I agree. Where she lived 15 years ago has absolutely no relevance whatsoever for her contemporary politics. The attempt to make it look there are two different peoples in Germany is POV and nonsense, and the claim of anon 195 that "East Germans" have been excluded from public life is bullshit and smells like PDS propaganda. The original East Germans have taken part in public life since 1945, and the people from ex-GDR have taken part in public life since 1990 - like Merkel, who became a federal minister in 1991. Those who have been largely excluded from public life are criminals, people with Stasi past and so on.
  • Yes, Thomas de Maizière is the cousin of Lothar de Maizière. See his biographical article. 93 15:57, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

The German Wikipedia lists de Maiziere last: [5]

Election campaign seems unbalanced (too much fun facts, too little substance)

I'm just wondering: Is this Reagan speec-thing really important enough for this article? I mean it's two long paragraphs, but definitely didn't decide the elections, whereas the VAT increase that she proposed and was quite unpopular is (now, after I added it) just one line, and the interesting fact that the SPD basically could do an opposition campaign based on the idea that everybody knew she wouldn't win, is not even mentioned. All in all the effect is that the election results seems to be based on minor funny things (Reagan speech and net/gross income, e.g.) rather than on political issues or, e.g., on Schroeder's qualities in the campaign... 23 November 2005

Settled. 129.132.146.72 16:10, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Something Confusing

Actually I'm a bit confusses 'cause Ms. Merkel is called the 34th chancellor of Germany. For Germans as me, she's the 9th (I hope I'm right). This count starts in 1949.

How does the author of this phrase count or are there any other meanings of chancellor I dunno about?

thx ming

Probably somebody confused Reichskanzler and Bundeskanzler. Actually, Merkel is the 8th:

1. Konrad Adenauer 1949-1963

2. Ludwig Erhard 1963-1966

3. Kurt Georg Kiesinger 1966-1969

4. Willy Brandt 1969-1974

5. Helmut Schmidt 1974-1982

6. Helmut Kohl 1982-1998

7. Gerhard Schröder 1998 - 2005

8. Angela Merkel 2005

84.178.236.11 05:57, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Ming, there appears to be two schools of thought on this matter of determining numerical order of German chancellors. I claim to be no expert of German history, much more the novice to be exact, but I have read through the Wikipedia German Chancellor listings here. It appears (especially from Ms. Merkel's listing) to be the general custom here on the American Wikipedia to be listing the German chancellors in terms of overall number of German chancellors and not just from post-WWII (West) Germany of the Federal Republic.

Ms. Merkel (or rather Chancellor Merkel?) is the 34th Chancellor of Germany (the overall number of German chancellors, from the North German Confederation Bundeskanzler to the Reichskanzler (of the Weimar Republic and Nazi Germany) to the present-day(Federal Republic) Bundeskanzler), and she is also 8th Chancellor of the Federal Republic. I think the Wikipedia entry Chancellor of Germany explains the issue pretty well, even for a foreigner such as I. --Jbook 07:42, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't really think that this kind of list is very important. However, I'm still puzzled that the North German Confederation and the GFR are put into the same basket, and I also think it funny that "Reichskanzler" (before and after the fall of the Kaiser) and "Bundeskanzler" are counted as identical. Let's see. George W. Bush is the 43rd President of the United States? You must be kidding, no, he is the 54th Monarch of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, counting the two Cromwells, of course. Hope you get my point. --wpopp 08:59, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

IMHO, she might be called the 34th Chancellor of Germany as well as the 8th Chancellor of the FRG. Wpopp, I get your point, but your comparison is not working for several reasons.

• The USA is not even geographically identitical to the UK of GB and NR, let alone a continuity between the two states (in contrast to state governors before and after 1776). The US was founded in 1789, the preceding Confederation in 1776, but under a different consitution (the parallel in Germany would be the German Confederation 1815-1867).
• There is a continuity of the office of chancellor since 1867 (but not any further back). Since then the Chancellor is the one who stears German politics under the head of state, whether Kaiser or President.
• The North-German Federation of 1867 is basically identical to the German Reich of 1871 - the only differences are geographical extant (the latter also included Bavaria, Württemberg, Baden, the southern part of Hessen-Darmstadt and Elsaß-Lothringen), and terminology (the President becomes the Kaiser, the Bundeskanzler becomes the Reichskanzler - however, the Reichstag and the Bundesrat retained their names). The constitution is completely identical.

A real break in the office is the end of the German Reich in 1945 - you can argue that the Reichskanzler before and the Bundeskanzler after that are two completely different offices. OTOH, you might consider the latter office the continuation of the former. Both views are valid, but I think that her being the 8th Bundeskanzler should take precedence. Str1977 10:01, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Str1977. Wpopp's comparison is not relevant. Germany as a state has been the same since the unification of the country. This has been verified by the German Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe (Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland ist (...) als Staat identisch mit dem Staat "Deutsches Reich", ruling of 1973). That the exact German formal title is somewhat changed does not make it a new office. In my country the prime ministers have used various titles, in the past something like "Chairman of the government" and now Prime Minister, but they are all counted in the same line. In the English language, there are no such things as Reichskanzler or Bundeskanzler. It is generally a problem that some Germans believe the English Wikipedia is the German Wikipedia. In the English language, the head of government of Germany is called the Chancellor and has always been called so. You may start at Otto von Bismarck and read through all Chancellors until No. 34. --83 10:52, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

German citizens, German newspapers and German politician - the German president included - count Merkel as the 8th Chancellor (achte Kanzler), and not as the 34th. I think Wikipedia should respect that, instead of making up new rules to count it.

Horst Köhler: "Der achte Bundeskanzler der Bundesrepublik Deutschland ist eine Bundeskanzlerin." [6] Stern [7]

Süddeutsche Zeitung "Der achte Bundeskanzler in der Geschichte der Bundesrepublik wird eine Frau sein." [8]

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung "Angela Merkel wird im Falle eines Unionssieges eingehen in die Reihe der Bundeskanzlerin und der Bundeskanzler der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, sie wird der achte Kanzler werden." [9] 84.178.236.11 10:55, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

You are lying. They count her as Bundeskanzler, not Chancellor. We have no word called Bundeskanzler in English. --83 10:52, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

First, I'm not lying.

Second, her position is officially called "Bundeskanzler", no matter if you have an english word for it or not.

Third, even if you use Kanzler as a short cut for Bundeskanzler, as the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung did in her article (link see above), she is still counted as the 8th.

84.178.236.11 11:07, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

They did not, the FAZ is specifically writing about "die Reihe der Bundeskanzlerin und der Bundeskanzler der Bundesrepublik Deutschland". Actually, reading German newspapers, I've seen her more often referred to as the first Bundeskanzlerin. But in the English language, we do not make such distinctions. Please respect that this is not the German Wikipedia. --83 11:17, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

They call her the FIRST BundeskanzlerIN (Female)and the 8th Bundeskanzler. And I know that this is the English wikipedia, but that doesn't give you the right to disrepect another country and to publish unsourced, unverified and false informations. 84.178.236.11 11:26, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Please, calm down. Both versions are valid. An encyclopedia is entitled to draw up its own list, counting her as the 34th. BTW, it is not common in Germany to number the Chancellors in everyday talk, unlike in the US, where it is common to talk about the 34th president. Another thing, is it necessary to include them both in two places (introduction and the info box)? (And please, 83 ... sign all of your comments - it's easier if you use four tildes (~)). Str1977 11:16, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

It is awful to put in parentheses and details regarding numbering in the opening sentence. The parenthesis "8th of the Federal Republic" is already in the infobox and don't need to be in the introduction. 83 -- 11:20, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Unless you can source the 34th, it should be changed into the 8th. And you will not find even one German source, a German citizen, German newspaper or a German politician, who calls Merkel the 34th Chancellor, while there are plenty of sources counting her as the 8th. 84.178.236.11 11:26, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

This is not the German Wikipedia. The 8th Chancellor of Germany is Prince Maximilian of Baden. His successor as the 9th Chancellor of Germany was Friedrich Ebert (SPD). In any event, Merkel would not be the 8th Bundeskanzler, because the first to hold the title was Bismarck. --83 12:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Also, I think there is some misunderstanding about the usage of "Kanzler" and "Bundeskanzler". The official titel is "Bundeskanzler", nevertheless, the term "Kanzler" is nothing else but the short, colloquial term for "Bundeskanzler". BundeskanzlerIN and KanzlerIN is nothing else but the female term for "Bundeskanzler". 84.178.236.11 11:38, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Before I get back to work, I can't help but insist on the fact that even the English Wikipedia is an open project, or does number 83 want fo formally exclude German contributors? And the linguistic argument is just a laugh. If you don't have a word for Bundeskanzler or Reichskanzler, it's about time that you find one. Because otherwise you can't even count them properly. By the way, even if the discussion gets a bit rough at times, I think it's one of the strong points of Wikipedia that we can exchange our views across borders so easily, and can influence each other on the manner to approach different countries. --wpopp 11:58, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

It's not Wikipedia's job to make up new English words. I am appalled that some German people think they can dictate English usage based on what is used in Germany. 83 12:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Of course we can... --AchtungAchtung 22:25, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not Wikipedia's job to change a countries history and politics in order to fit it into the editors limited vocabulary. And Maximilian of Baden was Imperial Chancellor (Reichskanzler), not Federal Chancellor (Bundeskanzler). Friedrich Ebert was Imperial Chancellor and Imperial President. You obviously have serious problems with German terms, or why do you keep on comparing apples with oranges? 84.178.236.11 12:17, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

The word Reichskanzler is meaning Federal Chancellor no less than Bundeskanzler. However, the title used in the English language is always simply Chancellor, and no German Chancellor was referred to as neither Imperial Chancellor nor Federal Chancellor in English, and this is the English language Wikipedia!. I do not have problems with German terms because I'm pretty fluent in German, but you have problems with the English language, it seems. --83 , 12:22, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

PS: You suggest Jacques Chirac was wrong when he yesterday adressed Merkel as Chancelière? He should have used Bundeskanzlerin also in the French language? 83, 12:26, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

The word Reichkanzler means Imperial Chancellor and that's NOT the same as a Federal Chancellor, unless you want to tell me that a "Federal Republic" and an "Empire" is the same thing. And again, you can't change German history and German politics to fit it into your limited vocabulary. And obviously you are not fluent enough in German to understand the usage of "Kanzler" and the difference between REICH and BUND. PS: I never heard that Chirac addressed Bush as "Mr President of the United States Bush". Did you? 84.178.236.11 12:43, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

In this context Reichs- is meaning "federal", as opposed to state level. Germany wasn't an empire (usually understood as monarchy) in the 1920s. Federal is not the accurate or direct translation of neither Reich nor Bund, but the translation coming most close to its intended meaning in English in this context. 83-- ,, 13:29, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Google news search (in English-language publications) for Merkel eighth chancellor: 575 hits.

Google news search (in English-language publications) for Merkel 34th chancellor or Merkel thirty-fourth chancellor: 0 hits

I think this makes it pretty obvious who's the one trying to press unusual viewpoints into the article. regards, High on a tree 12:50, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Could you all please asume good faith.

This is a valid discussion, but it should not stoop to name calling or insinuation. No one, I think, wants to rewrite history - it's rather a question of how to present history. We could have the same discussions about kings' numericals (in German history at least), if historians had not agreed to use this or that numbering. But in regard to the numbering of Chancellors there is no such convention - Google search doesn't help much, such a numbering is not common. Currently WP puts ll Chancellors from Bismarck to Merkel in one list (which is definitely a good thing) and numbers them accordingly. All Bundeskanzlers are numbered in that way (Willy Brandt is # 30). Either way, WP should be consistent in this. No matter how that's decided, the list of German chancellors should remain intact.

Some points made here are however incorrect

• The distinction Reichskanzler vs. Bundeskanzler is one of name only - from 1870 to 1945 the office was called Reichskanzler because this state (that throughout legally was a federation) was called "Deutsches Reich", before that it was called "Norddeutscher Bund" and hence Bismarck was Bundeskanzler and after 1949 it was called "Bundesrepublik Deuschland" and hence Adenauer and his successors were Bundeskanzlers. This is not about Empire vs. Republic - the Weimar Republic was hardly and Empire but it was called "Deutsches Reich".
• It is wrong to say that Bismarck was the first Bundeskanzler and Adenauer the second, as the title here is used in different contexts. FWIW, Adenauer was the first Bundeskanzler.
• "Bundeskanzlerin" has no bearing on that at all. The office is called "Bundeskanzler" and Mrs Merkel is number 8.

Thanks, Wpopp, for your message. I am German BTW, if you haven't guessed already. I understand your concerns, but I don't think we can for that reason leave out Hitler or break the line. If we break the line, it should be because of the break in history caused by 1945, because of the founding of a new state in 1949 (it was a new state, despite its legal continuity to the German Reich), and because of the break in terminology.

Str1977 13:26, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

According to the German Constitutional Court a new state was not founded. The Court write in its ruling of 1973: "Mit der Errichtung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland wurde nicht ein neuer westdeutscher Staat gegründet, sondern ein Teil Deutschlands neu organisiert (...) Die BRD ist nicht "Rechtsnachfolger" des Deutschen Reiches, sondern als Staat identisch mit dem Staat "Deutsches Reich"". This must be the basis for further discussion. The fact here is that the German head of government of the very same state (according to BVerfG) has always been called Chancellor and nothing else in English. --83 , 13:49, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I meant a new "state" in the narrower sense of "political system" - the Federal Republic was proclaimed as a Kernstaat for the reunification of the whole Germany. Str1977 17:55, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

A point in favour of numbering the Bundeskanzlers since 1949 separately is the ambiguity about whether Friedrich Ebert (not legally appointed and not uasing the title in general), Philipp Scheidemann (normally considered RK but actually dubbed Reichsministerpräsident during his term) and Schwerin-Krosigk (legally appointed by President Dönitz but only as "head of the government") are Reichskanzlers.

Str1977 13:43, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

In the German Wikipedia they are included in the Reichskanzler templates and lists. I don't think they have ever been referred to as anything else than Chancellor in English, and this is pretty much the same question as Reichskanzler vs. Bundeskanzler in German. 83. 13:49, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Just because both titels include the term "Kanzler", doesn't mean that both positons are the same or comparable. It's Apples and oranges. Reichskanzler and Bundeskanzler are not the same, there are fundamental differences:

der Reichskanzler von Kaiserreich und Weimarer Republik in Bezug auf die Befugnisse und die verfassungsrechtliche Stellung nicht mit dem Bundeskanzler der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zu vergleichen.

Der Reichskanzler des Kaiserreiches war dem Kaiser direkt verantwortlich, der ihn ernannte und entließ. Der Reichstag hatte kein Mitspracherecht. Der Reichskanzler war damit völlig vom Kaiser abhängig; ferner hatte er keinen unmittelbaren Einfluss auf die Gesetzgebung, er durfte in seiner Eigenschaft als Reichskanzler nicht einmal vor dem Reichstag sprechen.

Auch der Reichskanzler der Weimarer Republik wurde vom Reichspräsidenten ernannt und entlassen. Ferner musste er zurücktreten, wenn der Reichstag ihm das Vertrauen entzog. Der Reichskanzler war damit sowohl vom Reichspräsidenten als auch vom Reichstag abhängig. Auch wenn Artikel 56 der Weimarer Verfassung fast exakt mit den ersten beiden Sätzen des Artikels 65 des Grundgesetzes übereinstimmt („Der Reichskanzler bestimmt die Richtlinien der Politik und trägt dafür gegenüber dem Reichstag die Verantwortung. Innerhalb dieser Richtlinien leitet jeder Reichsminister den ihm anvertrauten Geschäftszweig selbständig und unter eigener Verantwortung gegenüber dem Reichstag.“), so war doch die Verfassungswirklichkeit zumindest in der Spätphase mit ihren Präsidialkabinetten eine andere. Durch die starke Abhängigkeit vom Vertrauen des Reichspräsidenten und durch die Abwahlmöglichkeit des Reichstages, der nicht gleichzeitig einen Nachfolger bestellen musste, saß der Reichskanzler zwischen allen Stühlen. Insbesondere das Missverhältnis zwischen der Ernennung durch den Reichspräsidenten und der Verantwortlichkeit gegenüber dem Reichstag war später Gegenstand von Kritik. Dieser Konstruktion der Weimarer Verfassung mit einem starken Reichspräsidenten und einem schwachen, in Krisenzeiten nicht allein handlungsfähigen Reichskanzler wird eine Mitschuld daran gegeben, dass die Weimarer Republik 1933 mit der Ernennung Hitlers zum Reichskanzler und der anschließenden Etablierung des nationalsozialistischen Einparteienstaates faktisch beendet wurde.

Der Parlamentarische Rat entschied sich daher in den Jahren 1948 und 1949, die Stellung des nunmehrigen Bundespräsidenten zu schwächen und den Bundeskanzler zu stärken. Insbesondere die sehr genauen und sich später bewährenden Vorschriften über die Wahl des Bundeskanzlers, das konstruktive Misstrauensvotum und die Vertrauensfrage haben die tatsächliche politische Macht des Bundeskanzlers mindestens ebenso bestärkt wie die starke Ausprägung der Kanzlerdemokratie unter dem ersten Bundeskanzler, Konrad Adenauer. Dessen sehr starke Interpretation der Richtlinienkompetenz des Bundeskanzlers wurde von seinen Nachfolgern verteidigt und führt dazu, dass der Bundeskanzler heute als mächtigster Politiker im politischen System der Bundesrepublik gilt.

[10] 84.178.236.11 14:00, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Please don't post massive amounts of German text here. Details regarding the functions of the Chancellor have nothing with the question to do. The Chancellor is the German head of government, and that's it. There are plenty of countries where both the exact formal title and the way the head of government function has changed a lot, however, it is very unusual to start counting prime ministers anew for every new constitution or constitutional change. It would create a horrible mess and be very unhelpful for the readers, and first of all, pretending there is no political history in Germany before 1949 is extremely intellectually dishonest. --83 14:10, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

And the German Wikipedia doesn't merge Bundeskanzler and Reichkanzler in one list, to distinguish between the two they created two separate lists: one for Bundeskanzler [11], and one for Reichskanzler [12]. 84.178.236.11 14:13, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

This is not the German Wikipedia, in case you didn't notice. The English title was and is Chancellor. You cannot write in German at the English Wikipedia. 83

Oh, my dear, 83, you forgot to write the word "dictate" with a k, didn't you? It's so, how shall I say, yesterday. Especially since I didn't dictate anything at all. OTOH, aren't you trying to impose some kind of paradigm that doesn't have a well documented source somewhere? Did the London Times or the New York Times welcome Angie as the 34th German Chancellor? And of course it's not the English Wikipedia's job to invent new English or American words, but yours. To say that there is no English word for Bundeskanzler points to a certain linguistic laziness. And because you don't have a word, the world has to be described in terms of your limited vocabulary? After all, there are so many English words in the German language, and we even found one for the English Prime Minister, even if we don't have such a thing in Germany. A bit of courage, and "Federal Chancellor" or something better will be part of the English language. I always thought that more precision helps to better understand. And it's perfectly ok to call the Federal Chancellor Chancellor or "Chancelière" as long as you don't imply that he's in the same lot as, say, Adolf Hitler. But you certainly didn't mean to say that, did you? --wpopp 14:24, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

All titles of German chancellors since Bismarck could very well be translated as "Federal Chancellor", but the title used in English is not Federal Chancellor, but Chancellor. 83

Well 83, since you are not German, and this is not German Wikipedia, why don't you just stop editing an article about German politics then? Especially since you obviously don't know what you are talking about. The Fact is, that #1 Reichkanzler and Bundeskanzler are different positions in different political systems. #2 Nobody counts or merges Reichkanzler and Bundeskanzler in one list (Just like nobody merges the former chefs of East Germany into the list of the Bundesrepublik just because both were called "germany"). #3 Nobody considers Merkel the 34th Kanzler. #4 you still didn't provide a source for your assertion that Merkel is the 34th Kanzler. 84.178.236.11 14:27, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

You are telling us that only Germans may write about German politics in the English Wikipedia? I am sorry, but you didn't win your war and the Germans have no right to dictate the English Wikipedia. Your comparison with the GDR is irrelevant. First of all, the heads of government of GDR were not called Chancellors. Secondly, the GDR did, unlike Germany, not claim to be "identical as a state with the state "Deutsches Reich". Merkel is counted according to a system used for all chancellors, which includes overall count (34) and Federal Republic count (8). This is the best way to do it. Most Wikipedias lists all German chancellors in the same article. 83

The DDR did for some time make such claims, though not on the level of state and international law, but they emphasized, especially since 1952, that they were carrying on the true German legacy, from the 1949 constitution down to their style of uniforms. Str1977 17:55, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but you have no right to rewrite history. Learn to tailor your concepts to fit reality, instead of trying to stuff reality into your concepts. And again, just because both titles include the term "Kanzler" doesn't mean that they are identical or that they are supposed to be counted as one. But hey, lets count the Bundeskanzler of Austria and Switzerland along with it, afterall, they are called Kanzler as well! 84.178.236.11 14:41, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

If you didn't notice, the Chancellors of Austria and Switzerland are not Chancellors of Germany. 83

As an afterthought, can anyone tell me Tony Blair's ranking since Walpole? The English Wikipedia has an unnumbered list, and I was too lazy to count. According to the same source, Tony Blair is the "current" Prime Minister. And no need for a "Order" cell in the accompanying table. A very wise editorial decision if I may say so. Because who cares anyway? So why number German chancellors if you don't count the British Prime Ministers? --wpopp 14:45, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Erased the unnecessary numbering. Peace! 129.132.146.72 16:10, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

@Str1977: Google News search is restricted to reputable media, so the above numbers are overwhelming evidence that viewing Angela Merkel as the "34th chancellor of Germany" is very unusual in the English-speaking world, to say the least, whereas numbering her as the 8th chancellor is very common.

I would like to draw attention to the principles of Wikipedia with regard to such matters, as in Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_publisher_of_original_thought (see defining terms under 1.) and especially Jimbo Wales' remarks in Wikipedia:No original research:

An article that makes no new low-level claims, but nonetheless synthesizes work in a non-standard way, is effectively original research that I think we ought not to publish. This comes up most often in history, where there is a tendency by some Wikipedians to produce novel narratives and historical interpretations with citation to primary sources to back up their interpretation of events. Even if their citations are accurate, Wikipedia's poorly equipped to judge whether their particular synthesis of the available information is a reasonable one.

Basically, this says that it is not our job to reason about which line of continuity of German state leaders is the most plausible, but that we should reproduce the interpretation which is common outside of Wikipedia.

regards, High on a tree 16:27, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

And according to that, inventing the new title "Federal Chancellor" is not our duty. Your cited and very limited material is irrelevant, because it is not usual, as noted before, to number German chancellors, and it is then usually not done in newspaper articles. All of your results are specifically referring to her as Germany's 8th chancellor ""since the second world war" etc,, not overall. Hey, they actually agree that Germany has a history even before the world war! Who could imagine that? Searching for 8th + Merkel and presenting it like you are doing is dishonest. An encyclopedia and a newspaper are two different things. We include those numbers (both of them) based on an undisagreeable list, because it is helpful information for the readers.

Also, the system used may differ. It seems our system are counting some chancellors two times, namely those with more than one term which were not directly followed by each other (for instance, Wilhelm Marx was the 17th and 19th Chancellor of Germany). Your attempt to arbitrarily destroy a working and established system is not acceptable. --83 17:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Mr 83, it doesn't help anyone if you heep accusations (especially false ones) on other editors, either here or on talk pages. Please, assume good faith, if only because it's WP policy. I am, as I said, neither leaning to the one or the other view and see arguments for both sides. There's really no need for an edit war. Str1977 17:42, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Let me state again what I oppose:

• Creating a new title like "Federal Chancellor" (uncommon in English) or "Imperial Chancellor" (quite misleading, even worse than "German Empire")
• Breaking up the list of Chancellors into various parts (I would however not object to a link from there to the DDR heads or the inclusion of them)
• Claiming that Bismarck was the 1st Bundeskanzler

I am getting more and more fond of the idea of doing away with the numbering alltogether. As I said before, it is uncommon in German and happens only when a Chancellor is elected or leaves office or in regard to Adenauer as the 1st Bundeskanzler or Bismarck as the 1st Reichskanzler. But not in any other context - noone would say the 5th Chancellor when talking about Helmut Schmidt, because no one would understand him without first using their fingers to count. Str1977 17:55, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, leaving it out could be a solution, but then it must be changed in the template (from "order" to "office") and in all articles, not just the Merkel article. 83, 18:02, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

All right. That shouldn't be too troublesome. There are, as we now know only 8 + 26 = 34 Chancellors.

Since 83, proponent of the "34" version (if I my call you this way), proposes this, what do the proponents of the "8 + 26" version think of this. Wpopp seemed to favour this too. Str1977 18:08, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually, there are 34 uninterrupted chancellor terms but only 32 actual chancellors (chancellors Müller and Marx served two times). Also, it seems that the infoboxes of the other articles than Merkel and Schröder are not yet converted to the template. 83, 18:16, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Wow my good Wikipedian friends, being German and basically not wanting to mingle too much with the English Wikipedia, I wouldn't dare to make a proposition. But I'm impressed that even Mr. 83 might agree to take the "Order" cell out altogether. Let me just say that 1) I don't care much about this kind of lists, 2) if an order number is used for Merkel, it must be used for every single younger or elder statesman in Wikipedia (a random check shows that the Order cell doesn't exist for Blair, Schüssel, Helmut Kohl, Helmut Schmidt and other equivalent dignitaries) - unless, of course, it can be arguably shown that German Chancellors need this system to better scrutinize them , 3) I don't see who would want to make all those pages consistent in the wrong (because not really relevant) direction, and finally 4) the easiest way to stay consistent is to remove Merkel's order number (and since the Americans like to count their Presidents, let them be the always necessary exception to the rule). Without wanting to diktate anything, im my humble opinion this is a solution nobody can refuse. Is it a deal? --wpopp 18:50, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

In regard to the "leave them out" proposal I can say what Shakespeare has Tyrell say to Richard III: "It is done." Also, Wpopp is mistaken, but excusably so, about Kohl and Schmidt - they used to be numbered too, but at the time he was looking I had been "through" with them. I hope no one objects now, after the work is done. In any case, I will not revert it again. But hopefully everyone's happy now. Str1977 19:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I am happy, not only with the result, but also with the discussion. Just think about it, four, let alone forty years ago this wouldn't have been possible at all, everybody putting his nose in everybody's kitchen, and getting somewhere in the end. And without any bloodshed at that. --wpopp 23:15, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Flat tax

Actually, I remember merkel proposing tax reforms and Kirchhoff being fond of a flat tax, but did actually Merkel really say to introduce flat tax at all? I don't remember that, but the new version of the article seems to say this. Can somebody tell me? 129.132.146.72 16:10, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

First of all, thanks for the peace-keeping mission, although apparently it's not over yet. If I remember well, Merkel put forward Kirchhoff as member of her team, let (?) him announce his flat tax ideas, saw the negative reaction and dropped him. --wpopp 16:33, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

The program of the CDU for this election didn't include a flat tax. Kirchhoff himself said that he would support the tax system the CDU had in its program but he would try to realize his ideas afterwards if possible. --Vierie 16:53, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

The flat tax was not a part of the CDU's manifesto - it was Kirchhoff's idea. The CDU's mistake was that they didn't take into account that voters might confuse the CDU's plans with Kirchhoff's ideas. When they "woke up", it was too late. Str1977 17:42, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Source for quotes, plannned move to Wikiquote

Does somebody know the sources for the quotes? I think these are important to prevent false quotes slipping in. (I removed a blatantly false and defamatory quote some time ago from this article). I plan to move the quotes to Wikiquote. Andries 22:24, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Protestant?

How is she Protestant, if her political party has had and has such strong ties with the Roman Catholic Church (if it isn't "Catholic incarnate")? Is there any evidence to suggest she is Protestant? Эйрон Кинни 19:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Of course she is Protestant. She is from Brandenburg, a Protest area. Most of Eastern Germany was Protestant. And in the CDU there are all confessions (regardless of the name), even many Jews and and Muslims. --Abe Lincoln 20:20, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

The last time I checked, Lutherans are Protestants. It is true that the CDU/CSU were originally reincarnations of the old Catholic Center party of the pre-1945 period, and it was also true that Protestants were distributed throughout the other parties, but today the CDU/CSU is a consolidation of the two Christian groups.

CORNELIUSSEON 21:11, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The reason the CDU was established was exactly that most Centre politicians didn't want the party to be an exclusively Catholic party anymore. Read the history section of the CDU article:

"The party's roots go back to the Centre Party, founded in 1870 to promote the interests of German Catholics. The party played an important role and participated in most national governments from the last years of the German Empire and during the Weimar Republic, but was dissolved in 1933. CDU was founded after the war with many members of the former Centre Party, but with the goal to include not only Catholics, but also Protestants, in a common confessional and conservative party"

The CDU is the leading conservative party also in predominantly protestant areas of Germany.

Academic title is part of Name acc. to German law

According to German law, the designation "Dr" is part of the legal name. It is included in all legal documents such as passports. This contrasts with Wikipedia guidelines. Andreas 14:34, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

No, it is not, that is a common error. A Dr. is allowed to let his title be registered in his personal papers, but there is no law that the designation is part of the name, and therefore a Dr. does not need to be adressed with this designation - to do so is just polite and common, but no law. See Doctor on German Wikipedia--mmg 22:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the information, and sorry for my mistake, Andreas 15:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Then why does her predecessor, Helmut Kohl, have Dr. as his title? I just added Dr to her title but I'm sure someone will change it. GrrrPlath81 12:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Main Picture

I agree with "boereck" about the main picture of the page. The file Angela_Merkel_PD3.jpg is clearly not representable for a figure of public interest like presidents (or, in this case, chancellors). In case Angela_Merkel.jpg seems not to meet the expectations, especially of "Str1977", maybe we should look for an alternative that meets both demands. Mine is representativeness. And with that I mean a picture showing a leader of a world nation, not an old 1990s documentation of fahion faux pas. Please seek the communication on this issue because the intellectual platform of wikipedia should not be used for a war of picture removal like it is going on between the members "boereck" and "Str1977".

Are we looking at the same images here? Angela_Merkel_PD3.jpg is a much better photo than Angela Merkel.jpg ... The former likely being a publicity shot, given that it has a decent, non-busy background. -- Ch'marr 01:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Approval rate

Hello, I just came across this page and was wondering whether a link can be found to the claim that AM has the highest approval rating since 1949? I searched the web, but couldn't find anything that backs up this statement. Can anybody verify this? 131.111.8.104 19:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I am studyding political science in Germany and I cannot believe that, after only 100 days, Angela Merkel was more popular than Konrad Adenauer or Willy Brandt ever were.--Arado 16:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Q

Why there is no word about the SUN scandal? [13] --Haham hanuka 19:10, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Physicist

Yes, Merkel was a physicist, but this has not te be mentioned in the openng sentence even before the fact that she is the German Chancellor. Merkel is well-known as a politician, her role as a phycisist is, although meritable, only marginally relevant for the average user. The editor who insists to keep Merkel's academic background in the opening sentence is asked to explain the reason here in the talk page.   Andreas   ^(T) 21:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Publications

The publications are cited in APA format instead of the more preferable Chemical Reviews or ACS format. I plan on making these revisions in the near future. Sanjayhari 03:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Bush Backrub

According to various news websites, U.S. President George W. Bush gave Merkel a surprize backrub on 17JUL2006 at the G8 summit in St. Petersburg, Russia.

I always knew he was a misogynist.

Someone should mention that he has a crush on her. -Amit

72.82.181.65 05:11, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Chemist

Although she self say physicist, working in physical chemistry in a theoretical chemistry group makes her a theoretical chemist.--Stone 13:17, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Theoretically, yes.--217.85.110.248 22:08, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Adding "Dr." to her title

I don't know why others oppose this. She still earned a doctorate, and her predecessor, Helmut Kohl, had "Dr." in front of HIS name in the first sentence.

Plath81 12:43, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

GA on hold

This article will be put on hold (for 7 days) until these minor adjustments can be made :

1. Well written?: Pass (weasel words were kept to the minimum; good continuity in reading)

2. Factually accurate?: Pass (citations are a bit all over the place and some citations need some but it is ok as it is)

3. Broad in coverage?: Fail (partly because trivia) see comments

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass

5. Article stability? Pass

6. Images?: Fail see comments

Additional comments :

• Image Image:Merkel greeting soldiers.jpg fails to state its fair use rationale.
• As chairwoman of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) she leads a coalition with its sister party, sounds like this implies that it is happening now and since it is an encyclopedia it would be more useful to have less present/current time mentions and so should be change like : As of ..., she led the ... as a chairwoman. or something like this
• repetitiveness in the lead section.
• "Anyone who really has something to say doesn't need make-up" should conforted by a citation if possible.
• Political commentators have debated the precise extent to which their agendas are similar, however (see [2]). sounds like its missing some words to make sense.
• Both Merkel herself and the CDU again lost ground significantly, in which the word herself is redundant.
• There is too much non-notable trivia that should be removed but some can be turned into an awards & achievements section.Lincher 14:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Enough time was given to modify the simple requests above. Since no user seems to be working on this article it will not have the GA status for it still fails some criteria. For any editor that would like to address the comments and the WIAGA criteria they can always request help on my talk page for assistance. Lincher 01:32, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

YouTube links

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed or you would like to help spread this message contact us on this page. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 05:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Link removed. The link to the corresponding news article was kept.  Andreas  ^(T) 15:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. ---J.S (t|c) 18:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Neutral Please

Its being pretty obvious what most writers of this article think of Angela Merkel. Not neutral at all.Opiner 01:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

wrong last name above infobox

someone changed "merkel" to "ferkel" (german for piglet - how funny) above the infobox, but i don't know how to edit that.

Pronunciation in audio file

The pronunciation of the name in the audio file sounds for me more like /aŋˈɡela/ than /ˈaŋɡela/. Both pronunciations (and also /ˈaŋɡəla/) are possible for the name Angela, but the second one is (mostly?) used for Angela Merkel.

Also, should the "Dr." be part of the link as it is not included in the audio file? ChKa 14:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

last name

does anyone know why she did not take the surname of her second husband?

--Jadger 01:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Most popular politican in the world?

According to the Macedonian Makfaxonline internet newspaper, dec 29, 2006, it is claimed that: "Merkel most popular politician, Bush and Putin's most unpopular... Angela Merkel tops the opinion polls in EU member-states, where she enjoys record popularity. Chancellor Merkel's approval ratings are highest in Spain and Italy - more than 60 percent. In France, Merkel's ratings hit 57 percent and 51 percent in Germany." (http://www.makfax.com.mk/look/novina/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=2&NrArticle=49409&NrIssue=232&NrSection=30). Yet I cannot find the source of these claims, or this information in any other online newspaper. If it really is true, it think this information should be added to the wikipedia-article, particularly because the already existing claims regarding her popularity is somewhat misleading. Hope someone can help! Jakobat 16:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Is Angela Merkel's mother born in Danzig, or in Elbing , what is correct spelling of mother's maiden name?

Angela Merkel was born as Angela Dorothea Kasner in Hamburg, the daughter of Horst Kasner (b. August 6, 1926 in Berlin-Pankow), a Lutheran pastor originally from Berlin, and his wife Herlind (b. July 8, 1928 in Danzig as Herlind Jentzsch), a teacher of English and Latin. Her mother is a member of the Social Democratic Party of Germany. Angela Merkel's great grandparent and grandparents lived in Elbing, Westprussia, Germany. The Drange daughter, married a gentleman name Jentsch, who is said to have come from Poland, according to Elblag sources. It is unclear, why Wikipedia spells the name Jentzsch and assumes Herlind was born in Danzig. Labbas 22 January 2007

---

---

Born as suck my ass?

Someone edited the page and inserted lots of fake information. I thing i fixed it, but can someone please check if it became ok? And someone with the athority should ban the ip of the one who did it...