Talk:Germanisation

	Writing portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Germany Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations. Once references have been added, remove the `\|unref=` from this template.

Archives

Archive 1 (Oct 2005-Dec 2006)

Germanisation: an historical approach

The only possible approach is historical. By the way, forced germanisation can be well defined as a bad thing. It is the case of the germanisation of the non-German speaking people in South Tyrol (XVII century) promoted by the Austrian Empire and motivated by religious concerns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.140.0.27 (talk) 14:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thers a problem here...

You act like Germanisation is a bad thing, like the "vile" and "evil" Germans were persecuting the poor, defenseless eastern Europeans. It would appear to me that this article is a result of the severe amount of anti-German propoganda in America and other former ally countries. I have read the text books that you "educate" your children with, sad is the only word i can think to describe it.

-Helmut Reiker

I'm part German and it annoys the bloody hell out of me whenever people act as though Germany is a horrible country or it's bad to be German. Germany was in need and Hitler abused it, they need to get the hell over it now, it's over. -Blakemore

Polish nationalism

result of the severe amount of anti-German propoganda in America

IMHO it's mostly written by Poles. Polish nationalism - especially in schools at communist time - has a long tradition in demonizing German history, e.g. the feudal wars against the Teutonic Order are interpreted as Polish independence fight, completely blanking out that the local German population supported the Polish lords! In this propaganda the assimilated Slavic or Baltic minorities were all per definition Polish and this "evil" process of assimilation was politically enforced, even long before the concept of a nation state was even born. The comparabel historical processes of Francization, Anglicisation and Polonization where huge linguistic minorities vanished in the last 2 centuries are in comparison very moderately discussed in Wikipedia! -- Popolfi (talk) 13:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move back to Germanisation again

This article was created at 12:41 am GMT on the 8th of March 2004 by User:Cautious using the spelling Germanisation.[1]

At 9:25 pm on the 2nd of February 2006 User:Darkildor moved it to Germanization without discussion labelling the edit "minor".

At 8:40 pm on the 6th of March 2006 Darkildor's move was reverted by User:Shii following discussion on the talk page.

At 5:51 am on the 18th February 2007 User:R9tgokunks moved it to Germanization again with the following to say "moved Germanisation to Germanization over redirect: Reverting from 2006 Move, to stabilize with the consistency of Wikipedia".

R9tgokunks, are you aware that the 2006 move you reverted was itself a reversion of an earlier move? Are you aware of Wikipedia policy regarding spelling? Are you aware that your stabilisation with the consistency of Wikipedia lacks the weight of consensus ... moreover that consensus is quite in opposition to this? J i m p 00:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the page back. J i m p 05:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

both are acceptable and proper spelling, I prefer the Z though because it is the more common spelling of the word (atleast in Canada it is the more common way of spelling this kind of word)

--Jadger 08:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, they are both acceptable & proper. What is not acceptable nor proper is changing from one acceptable & proper spelling to another without justification. J i m p 08:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Current state and overall quality

The paragraph "Current state" talks in great length about the situation of Poles in Germany, but completely ignores the fact that the Germany of today is a multicultural country with big minorities from Turkey, Italy, Russia, the Balkans etc. The paragraph (1) completely ignores these groups and the article (2) talks almost exclusively about the relationship between Poles and Germans. I miss the situation in Austria- Hungary, in Alsace, Lorraine, Schleswig and the german colonies. Right now this article is one-sided, if not tendentious. 84.181.102.244 08:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The article in its present form has an obvious anti-German slant and makes assertions that do not agree with reality.

Example:Descendants of Polish migrant workers and miners have intermarried with the local population and are thus culturally mixed.

It does not take more than superficial knowledge of contemporary Germany to see that the descendants of those Polish miners of the 19th century have by now assimilated. Usually the only sign of their allegedly culturally mixed state are Polish last names.

The peace treaties after the First World War did contain an obligation for Poland to protect her national minorities (Germans, Ukrainians and other), whereas no such clause was introduced by the victors in the Treaty of Versailles with Germany.

For obvious reasons: the treaty put German territories and people under foreign domination. Including that of Poland, where they were themselves subject to harsh Polonisation measures, as were other minorities, e.g. the mentioned Ukrainians. Textor (talk) 06:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tendentious language and statements

I would rather call it tendentious. It simply not true that the Polish language was persecuted under Frederick the Great. Frederick just cared for the loyalty of his subjects and did not care about their religion or language. He said: if Turkish Muslims want to settle here there are free to do so as long as they are loyal subjects. It appears symptomatic that only dubious Polish sources are provided for these allegations. The real "Germanisation" period started with the German Empire after 1871. After all, it was not very successful as can be seen from the numbers and rising percentages of Polish population at that time. In the first half of the 19th century Prussian culture minister Karl vom Stein zum Altenstein advocated the education in the respective mother language. In areas with a Polish majority even German-speaking children had to attend the Polish school. Education level was highest among the Poles in Prussia compared to their Russian and Austrian compatriots.

So, this article urgently has to be cleaned from POV language and tendentious statements apparently introduced by Polish nationalists.--87.123.106.71 (talk)