Talk:Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz von Groß-Zauche und Camminetz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz von Groß-Zauche und Camminetz 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.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
February 18, 2014 Peer review Reviewed
December 17, 2013 Good article nominee Listed
March 30, 2014 WikiProject A-class review Approved
Current status: Good article
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Germany (Rated A-class, Low-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.
A-Class article A  This article has been rated as A-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Biography / Military / Royalty and Nobility (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 WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (marked as Mid-importance).
 
WikiProject Military history (Rated A-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. A-Class
A-Class article A This article has been rated as A-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Former countries / Prussia  (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Prussia.
 
WikiProject Silesia (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Silesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Silesia 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 quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
 

Article created on temp page. Is copyright infringement-free. Please delete main artilcle and replace with new in temp. --Ansbachdragoner 04:01, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Generalmajor der Reserve[edit]

The German Arméd Forces had and have no Generals/Admirals "der Reserve". Generals/Admirals are always regular and professional "life long" serving officers.

The current version states that Strachwitz was "seriously wounded" in the Stalingrad Kessel and flown out- this would have been in Dec 1942. The next section states that he took command of a GD regiment in January 1943. How serious could that have been if he assumed a new command in a few weeks?

I am wondering if "seriously wounded" is the best translation. What does the original German text say? Rumiton (talk) 02:25, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
schwer verwundet MisterBee1966 (talk) 06:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hard to get away from that; "seriously wounded" is the only translation that fits, but I agree it doesn't work with his quick return to command. There is some leeway, though. Maybe if we just change it to "wounded". We are sure of that, while "schwer" might be a matter of opinion. Rumiton (talk) 13:10, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Hyazinth[edit]

We have two spellings for this. Can we choose one? Rumiton (talk) 12:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Good question. Most sources except for Röll, who uses Hyacinth, all use Hyazinth. The "correct" at least if his grave stone is correct is Hyacinth. see picture of grave stone. I beleive Wiki policy would be to use the variable variant over the correct variant MisterBee1966 (talk) 15:29, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Strachwitz's entry in Genealogisches Handbuch des Adels, (which is considered quite a reliable source when it comes to german nobility) uses the spelling "Hyacinth" as well Jake V (talk) 20:46, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
To make it more interesting, the grave finder site also spells it Hyaczinth. Can we agree on Hyacinth? Rumiton (talk) 15:20, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
German WP uses Hyazinth, as do Estonian, Norwegian and Polish WPs. Sca (talk) 13:51, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
the rule is how is he known and reflected in English sources. Hyacinth is what was established over the yearsMisterBee1966 (talk) 16:22, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

The Spartacists[edit]

The current wording in the lead implies that he fought on the side of the renegades, but I am thinking he would have been Freikorps or perhaps regular army still. Comments? Rumiton (talk) 14:59, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

He was with the Freikorps MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:19, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I will make that clearer. Rumiton (talk) 13:52, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
I see it was already clear in the main text. I should have looked more closely. :) Rumiton (talk) 14:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Versailles[edit]

The Weimar section states that he returned home in "early 1919" and then goes on to say how the family situation had been altered by the Treaty of Versailles. But the Treaty was not signed until 28 June 1919, and not ratified until 21 October 1919. It is probably just a matter of grammar. Can we clarify this? Rumiton (talk) 16:27, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Distillery[edit]

Is the distillery output in litres per year? Rumiton (talk) 12:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

30 advisors?[edit]

Who were these guys? Were they German ex-military people or someone else? Rumiton (talk) 14:13, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Maps[edit]

The use of Soviet maps notated, of course, in Cyrillic, is not helpful with articles on English WP, IMO. Sca (talk) 13:42, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Name[edit]

"Hyacinth," customarily an English woman's name, is the English spelling of the generic name of the flower – which in German is spelled with a z.

The subject was a German male. The subject's given and legal name was Hyazinth. German WP therefore uses Hyazinth. A newly published English-language history of WWII in the Baltics, Prit Buttar's detailed and thoroughly documented Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II – published by UK-based Osprey – uses Hyazinth in every mention. To persist in using Hyacinth for this person is an error, regardless of what past (mistaken) practice in English may have been.

Ref.: Buttar, Prit. Between Giants: The Battle for the Baltics in World War II. Oxford, UK: Osprey Publishing (2015). ISBN-10: 1472807499; ISBN-13: 978-1472807496.

MisterBee1966, please do not revert my edits again. Thanks. Sca (talk) 13:38, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

as the main editor who brought this article to the current state, who owns all the sources, I have a strong opionion. It stays as reviewed MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:10, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
MisterBee1966, please enlighten me as to why the name should be spelled with a c rather than a z. For the reasons stated above, it appears to be historically incorrect – in which case, any sources that spell it with a c are (were) wrong. Explain why this is not so.
No doubt you put much effort into the article, but that's not a reason to leave it in an erroneous state, no matter what your (or anyone else's) contributions have been, how many books you own, or how strong your opinion may be. Further, effects on WP templates are in internal issue irrelevant to the readers we serve.
Wiki is an encyclopedia of information, and you or I don't own any of its articles. An encyclopedia must be accurate, no exceptions. Of course there's leeway in military history for different interpretations of events, but not for erroneous basic historical facts such as misspelling people's names. (For an analogy, a few English-language books spell Hitler's first name as "Adolph." This is simply wrong. Would you stick with "Adolph" if you had worked on an article about him?)
I note that the Hyaz/cinth issue has come up before and it probably will again, since it's (IMO) a spelling error. Let's fix it. Sca (talk) 15:29, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
we all have to acknowledge that Wiki relies on how a lema is predominantly known in English. It is irrelevant how the lema is known in its native language. Köln is known as Cologne and the river Rhein as Rhine. The battleship Friedrich der Große is known in English as Friedrich der Grosse. In my sources he is predominantly spelled with a C. I am very much aware that this is incorrect but it is irrelevant and therefore it stays spelled with a C, as most English sources do. MisterBee1966 (talk) 16:11, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
to add to that, Röll is the primary authority in English and German. He spelled the name with a C. See the Note in the article to, which I had put there many moons agoMisterBee1966 (talk) 16:24, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
You haven't made a reasonable case for why Hyacinth would be the CORRECT spelling for someone whose given name was Hyazinth. English-language names of German towns and rivers are not analagous and irrelevant here. Personal names are whatever they are/were on the record. German, Estonian, Norwegian and Polish WPs all use Hyazinth. (And as noted, to English readers Hyacinth is a woman's name – as in the main character of this sitcom.)
Röll may be considered the primary 'authority' on this person, but that doesn't make him infallible. If historical names are misspelled by some sources, such mistakes obviously should not be perpetuated just because someone doesn't feel like changing an article. (BTW, since you evidently are highly interested in the topic, I recommend Buttar's new book.)
I've no idea what you mean by lema. Sca (talk) 17:16, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Support what Sca says. If Mozart was spelled Mocart in some reliable source, shouldn't we honour how he himself signed? (Bad enough that we say Amadeus whyle he signed Amadé.) - To give this man a woman's name seems grotesque, not to mention kafkaesque again, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia in general uses the spelling of foreign names as it is used in the overwhelming number of English-language sources; see Franz Josef Strauss. However, I'm sure that the English-language coverage of Strachwitz is much thinner, so there is no obstacle to use the German spelling, as done for Fritz Geißler. However2, there's a good case that Strachwitz' first name is even in German "Hyacinth"; see his grave here and here, at this website. He was certainly baptised "Hyacinth", but, according to Bagdonas (2013, p. 15) later used "Hyazinth". I can only conclude that the spelling was not fixed in his own lifetime, which is not unusual for that time. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:41, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, Michael. That seems to explain a lot.
Do you have an opinion on whether the article should use Z or C? (I got into this only because I'm reading Buttar's Between Giants, which as noted uses Z.)
If Hyacinth was his name, I still have to wonder why German WP and those other WPs use Z. – ??? Sca (talk) 14:34, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I am back home now with access to my sources. In Röll's book you will find a number of contemporary images (including an image of his grave which is already linked above), documents and newspaper clippings. In every instance you will find his name spelled Hyacinth (with the C). Please remember that his name is derived from the Polish Saint Hyacinth of Poland. In German, this Saint is de:Hyazinth von Polen (note the Z). I can only assume that his move to West Germany introduced the spelling Hyazinth. Historically, over many generations the first born son in the family was named Hyacinth and spelled with a C.MisterBee1966 (talk) 17:32, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Mr. B, thank you for your conciliatory message on my talk page. Due to that and Michael's post, I'm beginning to understand the situation from your point of view. I apologize for acting on (apparently) insufficient information when I changed the article to the Z spelling.
How about putting some sort of explanatory note or footnote in the article regarding the two spellings? Sca (talk) 21:45, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
From my cursory examination, it doesn't matter whether the article is named using "c" or "z", but an explanatory footnote – baptised in family tradition as "Hyacinth", then preferred "Hyazinth" – should be provided. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 23:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)