Talk:Hermann Göring

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Hermann Göring has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
June 2, 2012 Good article nominee Listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Military / Politics and Government (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the military biography work group (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group (marked as High-importance).
WikiProject Military history (Rated GA-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Germany (Rated GA-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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Politics / Fascism (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Fascism task force (marked as Mid-importance).
WikiProject Aviation / Aerospace biography (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the aerospace biography project.

Role in the Reichstag[edit]

This article contains nothing about Goering's position as Speaker of the Reichstag -- and HHitler's apparent fear of his control of the Party.

Nor is there anything about his personal cruelty to the left members of the Reichstag after they had been thrown into the camps.

-dlj. User talk:DavidLJ [1]

Battle of Britain section[edit]

I believe it is essential the Battle of Britain section should mention Goring's advice to Hitler to ignore the UK altogether, and instead overrun Spain and North Africa. There was never any chance at all of Operation Sea Lion being a success, since the German navy had been badly damaged in Norway and the Luftwaffe was not in a position to defeat the RAF. If Hitler had followed Goring's advice Germany could have won the war. ( (talk) 17:53, 11 August 2012 (UTC))

I have reverted your addition again. The website you used is a tourist website for Gibraltar. It doesn't say where they got their information, and it doesn't list an author. This is not a good enough source to use to add material to a Good Article. And it's not fair to put the onus on me to find a source! I don't have access to the Goring biography here that I used to bring the article to GA; I can do that, but I would have to bring it in on intra-library loan, and it will take 4 to 6 weeks to get it. Looking through my other main sources (Evans, Shirer) this material is not mentioned. It's up to you to provide a good source, not me. By the way, the date of 17 September 1940 cannot possibly be correct for the postponement of Operation Sealion, as the Blitz was ongoing until May 1941. -- Dianna (talk) 19:39, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Shirer (1960) says "diversions in Africa should be studied", but the idea came from Hitler, not Goring, as noted by Raeder and Halder after a meeting with Hitler in summer 1940. Shirer, pages 764–765. -- Dianna (talk) 19:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

The Blitz was used by Hitler in an attempt to break the will of the British people to continue the war. It is likely that he never intended to invade as it would have been impossible. ( (talk) 13:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC))

That's not true. Extensive planning was undertaken for an invasion, including the selection of landing points, commanders, troops, and targets for the first day and the first week. Troops were moved into positions along the coast and engaged in training for amphibious warfare. The invasion never took place, as the air superiority which was considered to be a prerequisite was never obtained. Evans 2008, page 136-145; Melvin 2010 page 186-193. -- Dianna (talk) 14:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Air superiority would not have been enough, as Grand Admiral Donitz admitted. The Germans had lost too many ships in Norway to get the men across, and the much larger Royal Navy would have destroyed the German fleet before it reached Dover. If anything the troop build-up was designed to keep pressure on the British government. ( (talk) 15:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC))

Aside from the terrible source used, the IP is right. S-L was indeed postponed on 17 September 1940 and its chances of success, with air superiority or not, were slim. It is debatable whether ignoring Britain and going for North Africa and the Middle East/Med. could have won the war. That would assume the British were the main enemy of the Reich. I would say it was ultimately the Soviets, followed by the Americans. A success against the British Empire would not have diminished the enormous (and arguably greater) threat of these two nations. Dapi89 (talk) 21:04, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

The USA were still neutral at the time. If the UK had been invaded, the effect would have massively prolonged the war (having no base of operations to launch Overlord). Also, you are discounting the technological developments that would have been stifled - Tube Alloys (started by UK & Canada, later renamed Manhattan Project) the ongoing development of RADAR, jet engines and the cavity magnetron, to name but a few examples. Also, with the emptying of the UK coffers, the USA economy would not have been kick-started into a war economy (the transfer of wealth is what helped drag the USA out of the economic doldrums of the 1930's). (talk) 08:44, 31 January 2014 (UTC) FW

The United States was NOT neutral at this time - Roosevelt had been giving material support to Britain for years. The Americans were not technically at war, but they had definitely taken sides at this point.HammerFilmFan (talk) 16:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

New addition removed[edit]

I have removed some new content that was added without sources. I think we are past the point on this wiki where unsourced material can be added to the articles, especially ones that have already achieved GA status. As well, the material needs to be re-worded to it is less about Speer and focused more on Goring. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:08, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Category German Lutherians[edit]

I used the rollback feature instead of the review tool. Apologies. My rationale for removal is that Goring was a hardly a practicing anything, except Nazi and art thief, so the new category seems very tenuous indeed. Cheers Irondome (talk) 14:55, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter weather or not he was a "practicing" member. He still identified as Lutheran till the end of his life. Therefore he is properly placed as Lutheran in the infobox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:10, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Summary (first paragraph) - Morphine?[edit]

So it says in the summary:

"He became permanently addicted to morphine after being treated with the drug for his injuries."

Then later in the 'Trial and Death' section, it says:

"Here he was weaned off the Dihydrocodeine pills—he had been taking the equivalent of three or four grains (260 to 320 mg) of morphine a day—and was put on a strict diet; he lost 60 pounds (27 kg)."

I don't know which is true - was he taking morphine (as in, actual morphine) or was he taking Dihydrocodeine? Either way there's an obvious contradiction in the article itself. Saying that he became addicted to morphine if he was taking dihydrocodeine is wrong, and while morphine is used as a benchmark to measure the potency of other opiates it doesn't mean it's a wildcard to substitute the names of other opiates with.

Icx120 (talk) 10:45, 17 August 2014 (UTC) icx120 17/8/14

It looks like at some point he was weaned off the morphine and dihydrocodeine was substituted. I will have to bring the source book in on inter-library loan to confirm this, but for now I will remove the word "permanently" from the lead. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:37, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I think we need to clarify this further. G would certainly have had a potential supply of morphine before his capture. There appears to be no evidence of G definitively giving up morphine prior to may 1945. I have seen references to G being captured with copious supplies of Codeine in his baggage. He would pop them at very frequent intervals in quantity. I am unsure if these are precisely the same as dihydrocodeine. I will have to dig out the sources, but I have seen these assertions in R/S over the years. I believe Cornelius Ryan discusses some of the above in his excellent early study of the collapse of the Nazi entity, The Last Battle, which is far superior to Beevor imo. Cheers Irondome (talk) 01:16, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Manvell on page 315-317 of the 1962 edition says that paracodeine (today called dihydrocodeine) is a mild morphine derivative. Goering was taking around 100 tablets of paracodeine per day, the equivalent of three or four grains of morphine. He had two suitcases full of the stuff when he was taken into custody. I was unable to determine at what point Goering quit morphine and switched to paracodeine as the book is poorly indexed and I don't think it's an important enough point to warrant re-reading the whole book. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Highest ranking Nazi official at Nuremberg?[edit]

In the summary, it states "he was the highest-ranking Nazi to be tried there"

in the Trial and death section, is states "Göring was the second-highest-ranking Nazi official tried at Nuremberg, behind Reich President (former Admiral) Karl Dönitz."

Which of these are true? is Karl Dönitz considered to be higher ranking than him as he became President after Hitlers death?

Davs34 (talk) 17:57, 6 September 2014 (UTC) Davs34

Hmm, I think someone changed the body of the article and missed changing the lead. I think we should go with second-highest-ranking, behind Dönitz, who at the time of the trial had the rank of former President. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:56, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
I would rank him at that point in time as second highest (even though Hitler had stripped him of all his posts and offices in late April 1945). Kierzek (talk) 00:52, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Nephew was US Bomber Pilot in the European Theater[edit]

I was just reading[1] that Hermann Göring's nephew, US Army Air Force Captain Werner Goering, was a bomber pilot flying missions over Nazi Germany and that the FBI placed a copilot in his crew with orders to kill him if the plane was shot down because of the propaganda value if he should be captured.
Dick Kimball (talk) 17:34, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


  1. ^ Frater, Stephen; Hell Above Earth; New York; St. Martin's Press; 2012
See [2], apparently Werner Goering wasn't related to Hermann, although at the time US military intelligence thought he was, hence the kill order Mztourist (talk) 04:51, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Revert deletions[edit]

I have reverted deletions of very relevant images of Luftwaffe aircraft. (talk) 07:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Since your edit has been challenged, per the WP:BRD cycle, you should not re-add the images unless there is a consensus to do so. Sorry I don't agree with the addition of these photos, which I don't think are very relevant at all. The Supermarine Spitfire and Boeing B-17 (which are not Luftwaffe aircraft) are certainly outside the scope of an article on Goering. Flight Lieutenant J H G McArthur, named in the caption of one photo, is definitely unrelated to the subject of Goering. If people want to know what Heydrich looked like, they can visit his article. Per the Manual of Style, there should never be so many images that they spill over into the next section. Also, there should never be images on both side of the page with prose in between, as the prose gets squished. That doesn't work at all on a narrow display such as a laptop or tablet. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:54, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. Aircraft pics have no use for an article on the MAN - not the Nazi-German air force of the time. HammerFilmFan (talk) 16:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

World War II[edit]

I'd rather this section be covered, briefly, in his leadership of the Luftwaffe and his contributions, or not, to the German effort in the air war. At the moment it is a brief summation of World War II and his Luftwaffe's involvement in it. Dapi89 (talk) 22:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC)


The article states: "Göring's body was displayed at the execution ground for the witnesses of the executions. The bodies were cremated and the ashes were scattered." Which bodies are meant, and where were they scattered? Concerning Göring, the German article claims that his ashes were scattered in a branch of the Isar.--Hubon (talk) 14:40, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

"The bodies" refers to all the people sentenced to death as a result of the Nuremberg Trial. Those receiving the death sentence were Goering, von Ribbentrop, Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streicher, Sauckel, Seyss-Inquart, and Jodl. (And Bormann, in absentia.) We can't add unsourced information to a Good Article; that's why I removed it. The German wiki is not considered as a reliable source. But I was able to source it to Overy 2001 page 205, so I have added it back in. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:45, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Dianaa! One more thing: Now it says "The bodies were cremated and the ashes were scattered in the Isar River." But wasn't it only a branch of the Isar? Sorry I can't help with proper reference, otherwise I would do the editing by myself... But maybe you can verify the aspect with your literature at hand. I'd be glad to hear from you. Best regards,--Hubon (talk) 13:04, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
That bit of info was not present in the source I used, so I did not include it. It doesn't matter to Goering's story whether it was a branch, anabranch, or the main river. -- Diannaa (talk) 13:18, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Well, I think it still should be stated correctly – irrelevant whether it matters in the aggregate or not. By the way, the branch usually stated (cf. German article) is the Ehle. I just would like to avoid citing a German source here... Best regards,--Hubon (talk) 19:09, 9 September 2015 (UTC)