|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article contains a translation of August Landmesser from de.wikipedia.|
Does anyone know if the famous photograph is in the public domain, and if so, what the canonical source might be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 04:24, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Under US law the photo would still be under copyright for the foreseeable future. Whether it is under copyright in the EU depends on whether the photographer has been dead for more than 75 years: possible but somewhat unlikely. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 14:55, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
- I've used that to create a version of the larger image with the circle "airbrushed" out: File:August-Landmesser-Almanya-1936-circle-removed.png -Jason A. Quest (talk) 02:34, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
References 1 and 2 point to domain "fasena.de", which doesn't exist any more. Does someone know, whether the material exists still somewhere so reference links could be corrected? Ktt (talk) 19:18, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
I object to listing and categorizing the subject of this article as a "Nazi". It flies in the face of common sense to classify an individual who was expelled from the party for defying its principles, and who went on to suffer hardship for his opposition to the party, as a member of it. It's thoroughly misleading, much like categorizing Ronald Reagan as a "Democrat", or me as a "Christian", based on a short-term affiliation that each denounced. Casting that wide a net for people to label this way threatens to dilute the category and list to meaningless. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:57, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
- It really does not matter that he was expelled from the party, he was at one point a member of the party. "Nazi" is defined as a member of the party. Therefore, the category applies.Hoops gza (talk) 21:09, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
- I would agree with JasonAQuest, it is highly inappropriate to categorise August Landmesser as a Nazi. The only question is to how properly to identify a relevant category--Resisters to the Nazi regime? Germans who renounced the Nazi Party, etc. that is both succinct in length and accurate in description but broad enough for a suitably large number of people and their actions to justify the category. Here we have someone (a) was briefly a member of the Nazi party (why? was he just following the herd for social reasons? survival? did he believe it? level of acceptance/practice of the ideology? etc.) (b) was expelled, (c) was persecuted, and (d) defied it--and we have to say that in a small number of words. The reason given is "hoping it would help him get a job" he joined...I know a hell of a lot of teachers in the northeastern US who join a teacher's union because they have to, despite not desiring to do so. But, to get a teaching job in this region, you have to join or you're unemployed. I'd wager that they probably would rather not be known as a union supporter if they had to be labelled and categorised. Comparatively, we don't label Benedict XVI as a Nazi (although some of the anti-religious Left would love to pillory him with the label), he is categorised as "German military personnel of World War II". It would be inappropriate to label Landmesser a Nazi without having more about why he joined and the nature of his participation, or an accurate way of saying he wasn't a true believer worth of being spoken of in the same breath as Eichmann. "Category:People who joined the Nazi party just because they had to" is a little wordy.--ColonelHenry (talk) 23:15, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
- The criteria for List of Nazis – a problematic article itself – stated (until deleted by Hoops gza) that they had to be "active within the party and did something significant within it that is of historical note". There is no source suggesting that Landmesser qualifies on either point, and every fact we have suggests it would be astonishingly unlikely. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 23:55, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
- "Former Nazi Party members" might work for the phrasing (there's a perpetually-half-baked "list of" article by that name). But I don't think such a category is really necessary. It's enough to simply refrain from putting him (and others like him) in an inappropriate category, one which tells us nothing meaningful about him, and misleads the casual reader. The purpose of categories is to identify "defining" characteristics about subjects. Even (for the sake of argument) if Landmesser were sympathetic to Nazism at one point, that would no more be a defining characteristic of him than my adolescent flirtation with Libertarianism is. Both are mere footnotes. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 01:08, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
No, a member of the Nazi Party, regardless of what his or her stance was in 1945, is a Nazi. That should be self-evident. That is why Oskar Schindler is still a Nazi.
As to the list, once again, a random editor added that criteria. The only criteria that the list ever had was to be a member of the party at some point in time. User:Keresaspa is largely responsible for the creation of that group of articles, and he never set forth "being active within the party" as a criteria. How could that possibly be a criteria? It is not defining. Being a member of the party, on the other hand, is defining.Hoops gza (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
- No one said anything about "the entire nation of Germany" joining the NSDAP, and we're not discussing Schindler, whose involvement within the party satisfies the above criteria. We're talking about August Landmesser, and whether his passive party membership is a defining characteristic.
- Also, Please stop claiming that the criteria in your list of Nazis was added by "a random editor"; it was was inserted in 2010 by the editor who created the article (as "A list of notable politicians of the defunct Nazi Party") [emphasis added] and one of its most prolific editors. He added it to the article to defend it from criticisms that the subject was too broad, during a discussion about whether Wikipedia should delete it. No one objected at the time, or since ... until I tried to hold you to it. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 01:40, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
I think that you are missing the point. Whether "the person's involvement within the party is a defining characteristic of the person" is not a defining criteria. Whether "the person was a member of the party" is a defining criteria.Hoops gza (talk) 02:34, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for your opinion, but it does not have consensus. Discussion is required to establish the outcome, and until that is finalized, there is no reason for an editor to insist they are correct. Johnuniq (talk) 02:44, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
I agree this article should not be included in Category:Nazi. He was expelled for cause and is known for resistance. As such, it is not a useful defining category. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:14, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Guy on the photo...
You have to add the important detail about Gustav Wegert
according to the german wikipedia! There are several reasons to suppose that Landmesser isn't the person on the photo but Gustav Wegert. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Landmesser — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 18:19, 8 September 2015 (UTC)