Talk:1936 Summer Olympics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Germany (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Olympics (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon 1936 Summer Olympics is within the scope of WikiProject Olympics. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge basketball article?[edit]

Maybe the contents of Basketball at the 1936 Summer Olympics can be merged here and that page be made a redirect to this page. Jay 09:59, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC) every one did good.


It is not included in the list of participating nations. Didn't it participate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:06, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Dated flags[edit]

Is that the proper Japanese flag for 1936? Didn't it have rays running from the sun to the edges of the flag? RickK 22:56, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

Not sure - I realise there could be some anomalies with flags. I'll go through and check later. I just wanted to fill out the table on all previous olympic games! -- Chuq 00:21, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Flag of Japan says it was only used for military purposes, so the 'Red dot' flag is fine. Still, it is something that needs to be checked - Sth Africa, Canada and India are also ones to look out for. -- Chuq 03:17, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
And the US flag would have 48 stars, if you wanted to have to deal with that.  :) RickK

POV about Sohn Kee-chung and Nam Sung-yong[edit]

The paragraph about Sohn Kee-chung and Nam Sung-yong was a classic POV claiming that they were "forced to" run and that their country had been "invaded". Not to mention being misinformed about the past state of their countries existence, they entered the field of athletic on their own without any coercing from Japanese government. Unless any and all country which had been another country's rule are thus be noted, it's simply a bad POV. Revth 05:05, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Partisan reporting[edit]

The '1936 Summer Olympics' is full of partisan reporting. Here are some problems I have been able to identify. Shakuhachi 01:48, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Top medal-collecting nations:

(for the full table, see 1936 Summer Olympics medal count)

Although the medal count for Germany is official, it would not be considered legitimate by today's standards since the German atheletes would have been disqualified because of drug use.

What a nonsense. First it is not known who used drugs. Maybe Jesse Owens did? And second: Do you believe that drug use have any significant influence on Gymnastics, shooting or equestrian, where the Germans had been the most successful. In athletics America was the most succesfull and no one believes that American sport had ever had lesser problems with drugs than most other nations.Sorry that you are pissed of that Nazi-Germany was far the most succesfull Nations in this games- but history is not always fair.

This is gratuitous and irrelevant. Does the duty to despise Hitler have to come at the expense of accuracy? There is no evidence that the German team used any more drugs than any other team at the time. By singling out the German team, it seems like a partisan attempt to deligitimize their victory.

  • In the marathon two Korean athletes -- Sohn Kee-chung and Nam Sung-yong -- won medals, running for Japan and under Japanese names.

This is extremely misleading. The names are not Japanese. First of all, the names they used in the olympics were simply the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese characters that make up thier names. Their last names, which are almost identical when pronounced in Japanese (Sohn was Son, pronounced exactly the same way, and Nam was Nan, with the n as the final consonant instead of m). Both of these last names do not exist as last names in the Japanese language, so it would be apparent to any Japanese of Korean watching or reading about the olympics that these athletes were indeed Koreans, and not Japanese. Their given names are also unlikey Japanese given names. Not impossible, but something like one in a million maybe.

  • German communist Werner Seelenbinder had planned to win the wrestling event and make a vulgar gesture at Hitler; but instead came fourth.

How can this be descibed as a highlight of the olympics when the event didnt actually happen? Again, this was only included to somehow 'fight Hitler'. Shakuhachi 01:48, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This article is still grotesquely partisan in perspective. The entire "Notable Wins" section is completely pointless -- how are those wins "notable"? Because they were achieved by non-whites, thus "sticking it" to Nazi Germany? Give me a fucking break. This is an article about an Olympic games, not about Nazi Germany. Cut out the extremely biased perspectives on this page. (talk) 23:35, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

"Grove" of sexual pleasures[edit]

Does anyone find that "grove" of sexual pleasures note a little fishy? I have no evidence against it, but the wording of it seems dubious. If anyone has any support of that it would be great to add in a citation. Twoblackeyes 10:30 1 Aug 2006

I can't find any information about this "grove" outside of the olympic village ellegedly used for sexual favors for the athletes. Every article dealing with Nazi Germany seems to have these obscure biased subjects added to them that are often completely off topic and serve no purpose other than to take another whack at the dead Nazi horse. I think we're all so used to having such a strong opinion about Nazi Germany and Hitler that it is second nature for us to reject and revile against anything associated with that movement. In doing so we all too often blind ourselves to the more subjective nature of history that neutrality demands. Under those conditions it is hard to come to an unbiased conclusion or viewpoint due to the emotionally charged nature of the subject and its devisiveness. Whenever dealing with this subject it is hard for us to admit that anything good at all might have come from Nazi Germany, at the expense of the more subtle aspects of reality. We are blinded and bound by the pre-conceptions we are taught in school, at church and have pounded into our minds each day by mass media, the internet, books, movies and tv drama which illustrates how we are supposed to think, act and react to certain ideas and situations. Those who talk about Nazism in any manor other than to villify it seem bound by some hidden law of concience to disclaim "I am not a neo-nazi and I think the nazis were totally evil but...." to avoid commiting some kind of thought crime or social taboo. You can see it everywhere on this site and every other forum dealing with this subject.

--Nazrac 22:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC) Did you know... that in germany you can get arrested for 10 years, no questions asked, simply for saying all hail hitler. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:29, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Not 10 years. This subject is being dealt with in the article Nazi salute which seeyou should consult. Dieter Simon (talk) 01:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)Dieter Simon (talk) 01:10, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Inconsistency about Peru[edit]

In the "participating nations" section, Peru is listed as first-time participant while in the map is not.

--Walkabout86 14:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Wrong facts[edit]

Acording to this article has some wrong facts.


I don't believe the salute link is appropriate here. I've reverted it once. I believe it belongs on a different page, if at all (it looks like original research). Comments? John (Jwy) 01:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


Is the quote from Hitler in Quotes original research? There is no citation for it. Could somebody Google this? 23:40, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Olympic torch[edit]

In the intro it says the olympics torch was introduced for the first time. Later it says it was used for the second time. Clearly one (or both) is wrong Nil Einne 00:31, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

As per the article Olympic Flame, the flame was first used at Amsterdam in 1928. It's unclear from this if it was used in 1932. The first for the Berlin Olympics was to have a relay bringing the flame from Mt Olympus. I will amend the article accordingly and also remove the reference to Leni Riefenstahl originating this idea, which doesn't seem to be sourced. (I happened to visit the Berlin Olympic stadium about a fortnight ago and there the credit is given solely to Carl Diem as per the Olympic Flame article). Valiantis 01:03, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Merge of Handball article[edit]

I would suggest we don't merge the Handball at the 1936 Summer Olympics article. It looks like there is a standard form for Olympic articles and the various sports. This would make it easy for people to find what they might be looking for without cluttering the main article with details about each sport. John (Jwy) 19:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. There are numerous X at the X Olympics articles, I see no reason as to why handball should be merged. Having these subarticles make everything comprehensive and less cluttered on the main page. Cvene64 17:54, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Absolutely don't merge! The conventions we've established at Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports Olympics call for a set of pages to be used for each Games: the main article (in this case, 1936 Summer Olympics, a page per sport (i.e. "Sport at the 1936 Summer Olympics"), to be used for results, descriptions of the events, etc. (e.g. Handball at the 1936 Summer Olympics), and a page per nation (e.g. Germany at the 1936 Summer Olympics) with results etc. specific to that nation. A lot of this is still work in progress, so some of the articles are missing or stubs, but the structure ought to be left alone until things can be filled in. I have removed the merge request. Andrwsc


I have seen on other Wikipedia pages about other Olympiads (more recent ones) a representation of the medals awarded in the Games. I was curious to see what the medals for these Games looked like, but could not find them on the page. Does anyone have a free-use picture they could post, or is there already a page out there with them on it and I"m just missing it?--Canuckguy 02:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I have access to high-res photographs of John Woodruff's medal that I could post. Taken by myself. DBishop1984 16:10, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Added. DBishop1984 16:56, 10 November 2011 (UTC)


The entire article needs copy editing badly. The Jesse Owens section is a particularly terrifying section for grammar nerds.

Onyva (talk) 08:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Iranian Team?[edit]

I have scanned a private black and white photo gallery for some friend, showing the Iranian team in the games, meanwhile there is no official name of Iran listed. I am wondering how it can be possible? I am just trying to find that friend and ask for the BW scans again to post them somewhere. Anyone knows?

Try Persia. Iran was announced officially only in March 1935. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neilgreatorex (talkcontribs) 20:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Shaahin (talk) 01:55, 26 November 2007


Is it me, or is this another biased article on the Nazis? All I read is "spreading evil" "spreading his hatred of the jews" "evil propaganda" I ask, where are the sources for these claims? It's far from neutral and some of the stuff in it is totally irrelevant... Bwyatt1991 (talk) 01:53, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Some of it is damn funny. You can tell children write this stuff. Only a kid could imagine Benito Mussolini clamoring away how the victory of Italy's football team was evidence Fascism was a successful form of governance.Polemicisto (talk) 21:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually, after having read this Duke University page ( ) on the politics of football (soccer), I have a feeling an adult could quite easily imagine Mussolini clamoring about how his state-supported team was evidence of successful governance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueminneapolis (talkcontribs) 20:22, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Where does the comment "Modern academics cannot agree whether the IOC during this period was a willing collaborator or an organization that favored the aesthetics of fascist governments" come from? What is the evidence, or even reference in the article, that suggests that the IOC was either a "collaborator" of fascist governments, or favoured their "aesthetic" (whatever that means)?. There is nothing in the article which suggests any political views of the IOC at all! (talk) 01:37, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

It is absolutely nothing BUT bias. The insane things they accuse Hitler of with NO proof has and will go on forever. Keltik316 (talk) 04:02, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Peru x Austria[edit]

"In the quarter-finals of the football tournament, Peru beat Austria 4-2 in extra-time, but a rematch was ordered, arguing that the field was too small for competition and that the Peruvian fans had stormed the field after the fourth goal. The Peruvian government ordered the Olympic team to withdraw in protest, seeing this as an insult, while Austria went on to receive the silver medal"

According to the Fifa site (, the Peruvian fans ran onto the field while the match was 2x2, not after it was 4x2. And there is no reference of "the field was too small".

Japanese medal count rationale for change[edit]

The first place and third place marathoners who won the medals for japan were in fact koreans. They were forced to run for the greedy Japanese and were disguised to be Japanese. Therefore, the medals should go to Korea, not Japan.

Korea did not compete as an independent nation in 1936. This is no different from Algerians winning medals for France before their independence, for example. Moreover, your change is WP:Original research, as it does not match any published WP:Reliable source. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 15:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Nations competing incorrect.[edit]

53 nations took part in these games, not the 49 suggested. This is the most glaring omission in a generally poor article. PhilipPage (talk) 02:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that? The International Olympic Committee's official page says 49.

Links to Roma people and gypsy[edit]

Re your summary to the edit of the article: "Please do not bypass redirects. In this case Gypsies refers to Romani people, so there is no need to link it too". But there is, you see, because there are actually two articles in Wikipedia, one Roma people and one to Gypsy. So, we are linking to separate articles and not to one article. In the case of Romani people the article is definitely "Roma" and not "Romani". It is in fact you, who is bypassing "Roma people" and not me. If you are linking to an article you should link to the correct title of the article in Wikipeda and not what you think it is because it may be confusing to readers to suddenly be confronted by different titles. Dieter Simon (talk) 22:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, you're wrong on both counts. The article Gypsy explains that "gyspy" may refer to various different peoples. In this case, the only type of "gypsy" being referred to is the Romani people. I only included "gypsy" in this article in case people weren't familiar with the term Roma/Romani people. Second, as I have just posted on your talk page, Wikipedia:R2D specifically says that there's no problem with using redirected links, and that editors should not attempt to "fix" them. And Roma people lists "Romani people" as an alternate name, so I'm sure readers will be able to handle the confusion. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 16:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Then hat is one of the rulings that really need a lot more qualifications built in, than it has been provided with. In the case of Roma people, yes, at least someone has furnished the alternative names and anyone can see what they are. But very often this is not the case and the Redirect should be immediately discussed and moved to its original name or a better name. In Grammar at one time, until I changed it, someone had linked Descriptive grammar to none other than Linguistic prescription (as you can see), which is the total antithesis of "descriptive grammar". (In other words we have no article on "descriptive grammar"). In the ruling on "redirect" it should be made much more explicit why we should not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken as the title claims. Here is a chance for someone! What exactly is "unprintworthy" as far as Wikipedia is concerned? Dieter Simon (talk) 00:06, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Obviously a redirect that points in the wrong direction should be fixed, as should links that could lead to more specific articles (ie. disambiguation). In this case, Roma people and Romani people both point to the same article, and WP:R2D suggests that you not "fix" what is not broken. The article Roma has switched back and forth between Roma and Romani numerous times in the past couple years. Both are legitimate titles, so there's no point in going through and changing all the redirects on wikipedia. This article, for instance, has numerous redirects in use (1936 Berlin Games, Games of the XI Olympiad, 1936 Summer Olympic Games, etc) and there's no reason to go change them. And now that I think of it, with this particular issue, many of those interned were likely Sinti who may consider themselves Romani people but not Roma. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 03:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I see that many articles od go on a journey of umpteen redirects, what I am saying is that when people, consulting Wikipedia about a subject, and find a different name/title than the one they were looking for then that is not an ideal situation for any encyclopedia creators, and it is certainly not great for those looking for an answer to their questions. As I say, they may be lucky that someone had the foresight to give the alternative names, but by no means all articles provide that and it can be downright misleading. I will have a look and see if those guidelines can be made somewhat more explicit, but it is a matter of finding the time. Dieter Simon (talk) 21:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Boycott debate[edit]

This is completely US centric & should be looked at, dozens of nations had internal debates about these games.Neilgreatorex (talk) 19:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Just added a stub on the Spanish boycott. Did any other country boycott the Berlin games? Sabbut (talk) 10:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

archived article on USA boycott debate from Jewish Telegraphic Agency(JTA)[edit]

From JTA:"December 10, 1935 Anti-olympic Forces Map New Drive Against Berlin Games New York, Dec. 9 (JTA) – Undaunted by the resolution of the Amateur Athletic Union convention backing participation in the Berlin Olympics, the forces opposing the Nazi games began to rally today for a new offensive.

The participation resolution, introduced by Gustavus T. Kirby, treasurer of the American Olympic Committee, and passed yesterday in the closing hours of the parley at the Commodore Hotel, was followed by a number of resignations from Olympic posts.

First, Jeremiah T. Mahoney, president of the A.A.U., refused to accept the mandate of the convention and declined nomination for any office "to devote my energies to preserving the honor of American athletes." He also resigned from the American Olympic Committee executive, but retained his membership in the committee.

His lead was followed by Louis di Benedetto, secretary-treasurer of the Southern A.A.U. and member of the A.O.C. executive; Charles L. Ornstein, A.O.C. member, Miss Charlotte Epstein, A.O.C. member and Harry D. Henshel, member of the Olympic Basketball Committee.

Berlin-Olympic opponents were today mapping plans for a new offensive against the Nazi games. They pointed out that in two tests of strength during the convention the A.A.U. delegates gave a majority to the anti-Berlin resolutions, but the balance was swung by votes of affiliated organizations.

A number of these organizations, Judge Mahoney charged today, registered at the last moment, in violation of the A.A.U. requirement that they register twenty days before the convention.

One of the concrete proposals expected to be put forth shortly is to send a commission of three headed by Mr. Mahoney to Germany to investigate conditions.

A similar proposal for a fact-finding commission, laid before the closing session of the convention by Supreme Court Justice Aaron Steuer as a compromise measure, was turned down by the narrow margin of 2½ votes although the tally of A.A.U. delegates showed a majority of eleven for the resolution.

Defeat of the amendment left the field open for passage by viva voce vote, without dissent, of the Kirby resolution, which backed participation but, as a sop to the anti-Nazis, asked the International Olympic Committee to exercise vigilance in protecting participants against discrimination.

The debate on the resolution was marked by recriminations and an atmosphere of tenseness, as was the case when the first big issue of the convention came up -- the resolution introduced by the Executive Committee by a 10 to 5 vote scoring the Nazi Olympics, calling on athletes to stay out and calling on Olympic bodies to take steps to remove the games.

Brought into the plenary session under an agreement between opposing forces that the resolution would be discussed two hours by each side, it suddenly met a parliamentary obstacle in the form of a motion to table by Patrick J. Walsh, one of the Brundage lieutenants.

The resolution took anti-Olympic forces by surprise, and after a roll call vote without discussion, the motion won -- by six votes, although it would have lost had not such allied bodies as the German-American sports club been represented.

Immediately Kirby introduced his resolution, Ornstein keaped to the floor, denounced the "double-dealing," and introduced an amendment to the Kirby resolution, stating it to be "the sense of this convention that the A.A.U. is opposed to participation in the 1936 Olympic Games."

The amendment was later withdrawn so that Justice Steuer could introduce his compromise, which provided for naming of a commission of three to investigate conditions in Germany, one member each to be named by Brundage and Mahoney and one elected by the ex-presidents of the A.A.U."

(excerpt from JTA archives by Richard Peterson) (talk) 23:12, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

info on Jack Rafferty and Louis di Benedetto from "Triumph" by Jeremy Schaap[edit]

[In addressing the AAU delegates, Rafferty said]"We say we are trying to inculcate in our youth the principles of fair play, and we give an example in our own councils of throttling free and open discussion in violation of an earlier agreement." [[Louis di Benedetto speaking to delegates, said of participating in the Olympics]:"betrayal of honor and sportsmanship by any Catholic, Protestant, or Jew who loves his God." (excerpts from 'Triumph:The untold story of Jesse Owens and Hitler's olympics" by Jeremy Schaap) (talk) 23:29, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


Speaking of the flags, surely the Nazi flag doesn't belong in the "bidding" table. After all, when the IOC met to vote on who should host the '36 Olympics, Hitler wasn't in power — the Weimar Republic was. So surely the flag in the "bidding table" should be that of the Weimar Republic (which is the same as the current flag of Germany), yeah? —MicahBrwn (talk) 17:49, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Participating nations[edit]

I'd suggest to mention several nations that originally intended to participate, but did not do so in the end (for a variety of reasons):

  • Haiti
  • Honduras
  • Panama
  • Spain

Source: Walter Richter: Die Olympischen Spiele 1936 in Berlin und Garmisch-Partenkirchen Band 1. Cigaretten-Bilderdienst, Altona-Bahrenfeld 1936. -- (talk) 23:41, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Article each day in Portuguese Wikipedia[edit]

I found an only article pt:7 de agosto nos Jogos Olímpicos de Verão de 1936 in the Portguse Wikipedia which have the link Macrolympics.-- (talk) 23:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Anti-homosexual laws[edit]

It is extremely doubtful that Germany needed to ease the strictures of its anti-homosexual laws, or that it would have any desire to do so. In 1936, and even as late as the 1970's in the United States, homosexuality was not something that was flaunted.John Paul Parks (talk) 05:16, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Fascist leanings of the IOC[edit]

I note this accusation in the article under 'Bidding process': "Many commentators have noted the IOC's fascist leanings, which even the most generous historians characterize as "bizarre""

I also note that it is referenced, the issue I have with this statement is that it is quiet an accusation to make could be seen to be WP:NPV whilst the citation links to a book on Google that only allows a limited preview, with no indication of where in the book this can be verified. Can we have an additional source that would make it easier to verify the information or at least format the existing reference correctly so we know the page number, title etc and can all go down to our local library and look it up :-). --Wintonian (talk) 22:17, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect Greek Flag?[edit]

In the current article, it shows the Greek flag as the older style blue with the white cross, which according to the Flag of Greece page is correct for this time.

However, I managed to find an IOC clip of the opening ceremony on YouTube (of all places). And, at the time of 0:20, it shows Greece (as 'Griechenland') march out - followed by the flag which closely resembles (or is, it's difficult to tell because the clip is black and white) the CURRENT flag of Greece. Here is the clip:

Is this sufficient to change the image on the current page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blade aussie (talkcontribs) 11:27, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

It's probably just a fluke, but I did a double-take on "crushing"[edit]

In the "Notable Wins" subsection, there's a line: "The 20-year-old El Touni lifted a total of 387.5 kg crushing two German world champions". It's probably just me, but at first I read this as if he, upon lifting the barbell over his head, accidentally dropped it onto the two Germans and literally crushed their bodies, killing them. I'm not going to change it myself, because I have a migraine and so it could just be the craziness from that. SamuelRiv (talk) 00:15, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Error in "Participating nations" map[edit]

The map in the "Participating nations" does not not acurately represents the Peru-Ecuador border. It is not even close to what it should be. Just look for either the Peru or Ecuador articles in Wikipedia (or Google it) and compare to what is shown in the map. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:15, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Dead link[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 3[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 12:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

1936 Olympic Gold Medals[edit]

As the 2012 Olympics are still on, several people have asked if the gold medals are actually gold? On several sites it states that this has not been so for over 100 years. However, several historical documentaries covering Hitler's period have stated in the 1936 Olympics for propaganda reasons, the Gold medals was in fact made of solid gold. These were to be be presented by Hitler himself to the winners of the events. If this is correct, then the first statement requires amending to support this fact.Slm1960 (talk) 19:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Olympic Village and its commandant[edit]

Sorry, but the Daily Mail article used as a source on the Olympic Village is sensationalist, tabloid crap. Eg: The rings in the gymn are not the originals but reproductions, there is no painting of Soviet soldiers - it shows in fact Lenin, there is no evidence that the KGB was active in this location - in truth, it was a low security living area for ordinary Soviet troops and Germans from the area were allowed to shop at the local commissary, the cremated remains buried there were wounded German soldiers who had been cared for in the military hospital when the Soviets took it over and who then died from their injuries, the bas- relief was added after the games when the facility had become an infantry school, the reconstructed house is called the "Jesse Owens house" but it was actually not the one he had been staying in. This article should not be treated as a reliable source. The topic deserves better!

I also posted this on the Talk page of village commandant Führer:


I just took a tour of the Olympic Village. The very well-informed tour guide who has done a lot of research on the facility said that it was just a rumour that Fürstner had been Jewish. All Wehrmacht personnel were checked for Jewish family history in 1934. Certainly someone in such a high profile position would not have escaped discovery until such a late date. It does not sound unreasonable that he really was fired for the damage caused to the village. This seems to have been quite significant and the Nazis might well have felt that their reputation as a professional and efficient host was at stake. It would have been quite humiliating for the leaders of the "New Germany" if the guests at this high-visibility event had arrived at a badly damaged facility.

An alternative explanation is that he committed suicide because his wife had cuckolded him with a friend.Drow69 (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


I'm sure I remember this being the much more widely-know emblem of the Berlin Olympics, and I'm also pretty sure it used to be at the top of the WP article back in the day. Now it appears to have been completely deleted from Wikimedia in general. What gives? BigSteve (talk) 19:39, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 1936 Summer Olympics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Edit reverted. @Cyberpower678: Perhaps do a check if the source url is 200. If it is, do not archive the link, despite being marked as dead? (tJosve05a (c) 21:30, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Sorry no can do. The tag override parameter is set to true and the link verifier is disabled, per consensus. The bot isn't ready to check links yet, just archive them.

and the propaganda continues[edit]

This is without a doubt the biggest piece of garbage of an article ever written on Wikipedia. You mention Hitler over 30 times? Keltik316 (talk) 03:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)