Talk:Josef Mengele/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



This article does not cite references

Science fiction or science Maybe Mengele just used artificial insemination with a syringe, using some Nordic material?--Revery (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Mengele: the Angel of Death in South America

There is a new book coming out by Argentine historian Jorge Camarasa, a specialist in the post-war Nazi flight to South America in which he claims the experiments were continued in south america:

easytiger (talk) 11:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


Sorry for putting this thread up here, but I've just looked through the history of this article, and I would strongly recommend it for semi-protection (so that only signed-in users can contribute). Otherwise you'll keep having thousands of edits by nitwits who love Bruce (which is fair enough), Mengele, or the word "douche". Any suggestions? Trigaranus (talk) 10:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

  • I request it yesterday, which Rudget tended to: "(sustained vandalism [edit=autoconfirmed:move=sysop] (expires 19:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)))" WilliamH (talk) 12:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Cheers. Trigaranus (talk) 10:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Married to

He was married to Irene Schoenbein. oH MY GOD WHAT A LOAD OF BULLSHIT —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Display issues?

In the first part of the article (Early life, career, and education), the fourth sentence is displaying multi-national with a space between the i and o. I checked the actual article and there is no tags for this. Any ideas? 4wj4ek fnbsdiluhfgbMNBUXYH —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:32, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


While Dr. Mengele's degrees were revoked in 1964, he still is (and should be) referred to as Doctor, whether you like what he did or not. The universities of Frankfurt and Munchi had no grounds to revoke his degrees. There is no evidence that his college work was falsified or plagerized. The two universities revoked his degrees because it was the "politically correct" thing to do since he was a war criminal. Murderers can't simply be revoked or denied their degrees they earned simply because later in their life, they committed crimes.

i don't think it is up to this article to decide if the universities had no grounds to revoke his degrees. maybe they did so because his work was based on an unscientific worldview as much as because of his crimes. the work that earned him the degrees was closely connected to his later criminal research in auschwitz. trueblood 11:48, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
regarding the line "Murderers can't simply be revoked or denied their degrees they earned simply because later in their life, they committed crimes." Actually, they can and have been. The rules of both universities and indeed many universities around the world state that a degree can be revoked if the holder does something in later life that brings disrepute to the institution. I've removed the "Dr." tag. I'm a student doctor and if I did what he did I'd expect to be stripped. Fr33kMan 19:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Mause he violated the Hippocratic Oath and used his knowledge in an unethical way, to harm rather than to heal. Violation of the Hippocratic Oath is a common ground for such revocation everywhere western medicine is practiced. There are other less famous cases where this has happened. It has nothing to do with the quality, or lack thereof, of the subject's med school work. It is rather a type of malpractice, with adjudication going further than just revocation of a license to practice, but revocation of the degree by the medical school that granted it. And beyond medical schools, every university retains the right to revoke any degree not only for fraudulent or sub-standard academic work, but via an "exceptional circumstances" clause that would be applied on a case by case basis. Finally-- when a degree is revoked, it's revoked. Mengele was no longer a doctor after his degrees illegitamate.

Revisionist History/Concealing Truth

In my opinion, this article does not put enough emphasis on Josef Mengele's intelligence, good-looks, and academic aptitude as a young man. It also does not contain the well-known fact that he was not loved, and borderline abused by his parents which may have explained, (but don't get me wrong, will never EXCUSE what he did at Auschwitz later in life). His status as a war hero in WW2 also deserves more explanation and credit. These facts are rarely, if ever spoken about by the mainstream media, and are encyclopedic as long as they can be substantiated in fact. If necessary I will cite my sources when editing this article, including the COURT TV website which has perhaps the most thorough and detailed biography of Dr. Mengele that I have ever seen posted online. The bottom line is what made Dr. Mengele so intriguing and different was that he was anything but the one-sided monster that his later atrocities garnered him infamy for (and deservedly so). The bottom line is, if a handsome, athletic, intelligent young man today gained a PhD at 24, plus an M.D. at 27, then forsakes a lucrative medical or academic career to join the military as a commissioned officer who volunteers for combat, plus peformes heroic acts of bravery (pulling 2 men out of a burning tank, deep behind Soviet lines, under enemy fire), and survives, only to be awarded some of the most prestigious military awards of the era, comparable to the U.S. Purple Heart, Silver Star, and Distinguished Service Cross, he would be plastered over the media and worshipped as a war hero in modern society. This was a complex man who deserves a complex biography, detailing both his acts of good and evil. I am including these positive aspects of Mengele's life in order to give a full perspective on the man, and NOT in any means to excuse his crimes. Hate is easy to marginalize when its perpetrated by a bunch of drunk, undeducated skinheads talking in a bar about why the world is terrible because of certain races. Its tougher and more thought provoking when educated heroes sink to the levels that they do in order to achieve those ends. There is more to this man's story than is currently in the article. When I post the positive FACTUAL data about Mengele's life, please stop editing it out. This article should reflect both Mengele's good and evil sides, and the reader should be able to make up their own minds about him and why he did what he did. Stereotypes are easy to throw around, but the deeper truth is harder to palate. This article should be about EVIL, but lets be fair and balanced about it.

In my opinion this article is not about "GOOD and EVIL" , but about relevant information about a major war criminal of wwII. this article needs a good clean up. the evaluation of mengele from the auschwitz authorities is horrible and as useless as some nazi propaganda in a article about wwII. how about a quote from some survivor who experienced him on the job at the ramp doing selection. the article could do a better job explaining what the selection mean and what implications it had for the victims also frankly i don't quite get your point about heroic acts of bravery, he saved two people in the war you say, so what. that's rather thin on the plus side for somebody who is responsible for the death of thousands. and don't forget in which war he won his medals in. i fail to see much of mengeles good sides that the article should reflect trueblood 20:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

The deed that he won that Iron Cross for is well documented. It is a historical fact and deserves mention. You are one of the revisionist people I was talking about obviously.

Why don't give a reference for this fact. I don't understand what you mean by revisionist. I thought that term is usually reseverd for people that deny the holocaust, like that quote from the ausschwitz administration came from a revisionist web page. I don't want to see mengele described as a demon but just what he did. so far this article somewhat tried to paint a positive picture as far as possible. the fact that he was awarded in this war does not hint to a positive side but fits in smoothly with his later deeds, as does the topic of his 'brilliant' academic career.trueblood 11:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I added the quote you wanted. I'm not including any of this to show a "positive" side of Mengele, but to highlight the complexity of this individual. Again, one of the reasons Mengele is such an intriguing historical figure is because he tends not to fit the norm of the typical hatemonger. It is important to note how many other infamous Nazis such as Eichmann, Amon Goeth from Schindler's List, Himmler (a former chicken farmer), and even Hitler himself had lives marred with failures prior to them becoming involved with the Nazi bureaucracy. Mengele's enormous intellect and potential, combined with his fits of kindness (such as with the troupe of dwarves), makes his evil deeds all that more shocking. I think you and I both agree that Mengele was an evil person, and i'm not trying to "prop him up", just adding facts about his life to give a full picture of the man.

where are you taking all this stuff about mengele's enormous intellect from. i must admit i don't give a lot on the court tv bio. it is written by a journalist not a historian, it's main purpose i almost want to say is to entertain, not to inform. it's rather for mengele's intellect, he subscribed to complete bogus science and performed absurd experiments not just from an ethical but from a scientific point of view.trueblood 19:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

He earned an M.D. and a Ph.D. from two of the most prestigious universities in Europe at the time, both recieved before he was 28 years old. I think that certainly says something about his intellect. I'm not saying he was a genius, he obviously wasn't, but he did have a lot more education than your average SS officer.

Bad Link Discrepancy

The link to his mother Walburga redirects to to Saint Walpurga, who lived 1300 years ago.


The first part of the article, and even throughout it, has been spammed. Don't get me wrong, I believe that this man was evil, but spamming his wikipedia article is not the proper way to display your disgust. I would change it, but I don't know what it had said. -Andrew Markiewicz

Early life wording

Mengele in a car and went to the car and was so was born in Günzburg, Germany,...

This obviously needs to be fixed. I would, but I'm not even sure what it's supposed to be saying - was he born in a car on it's way towards Gunzburg? Can anybody clean this up? Cat Parade 19:43, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Pronouncing Mengele's name

Is it a hard or soft 'g' sound? -Mr. Tachyon

My teacher pronounces his name "men-GEL-ee" Link9er 15:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I've always heard it pronounced "Men-gel-ah".

"ng" is one sound, the "g" isn't pronounced separately. It's something like "ME-nge-leh" or IPA [ˈmeŋeˌle] (primary stress on first syllable). I'm German and I'm certain about this pronunciation.-- 02:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

What if Mengele was paid off?

There's no denying that after WWII the Allies paid of the Japanese mad doctor of Unit 731 Shiro Ishii in exchange for all his biological and chemical tests on live human subjects. So isn't it suspicious that the "efforts" of the Allies failed to find Joseph Mengele despite their multiple successes at capturing other top war criminals?

We can agree that the tests of Mengele were the sickest crimes against humanity BUT his data collected was invaluble nonetheless. That's why I believe the Angel of Death was paid off secretly by the Allies, like the doctors of Unit 731, and all efforts to hunt him down was minimized. --Secret Agent Man 17:19, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Since I worked on Josef Mengele on a scientific basis, I revised the Mengele-biography. Several errrors corrected and some new information added. For information on my person and my book on the subject (for those who read German) at --Cellarius 09:55, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wondering what he did between 1949 and 1979 in south-america? working? how was he financed? MJanich

As far as I know he performed abortions for a living. Philwelch 22:00, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
Are you joking? Kent Wang 06:38, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
Any facts to back that up Philwelch? That would be one hell of a contribution to the article. --Arm
Couldn't have - since it's not true. Information on where his funds came from added. --Cellarius 09:55, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yes it is true here is a page about it.

Mengele an Abortionist, Argentine Files Suggest, New York Times, February 11, 1992, Nathaniel C. Nash, page A8. I'm sure such astute researchers could find 'Mengele AND abortionist' in any decent public library's online databases. You don't consider the New York Times 'some ridiculous pro-life site,' do you? -BeLoverly

The page of the German historical Museum [1] states he was sentenced to lifelong imprisonment in the Nuremberg doctors' trial. Include this in the article or not? Get-back-world-respect 15:07, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

How could he be sentenced to life in prison if he escaped Europe and was living in South America? --Arm
In absentia. - Nunh-huh 07:26, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
The information on Mengele provided by the DHM is more than faulty. The current version will be revised in the next weeks. Mengele was never tried, not even in absentia. --Cellarius 09:55, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Exactly. Check the trial proceedings (first part) and trial proceedings (second part): Mengele was not tried in the Doctors' Trial. AFAIK, he was never tried at all. I've removed that sentence. Lupo 15:13, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Relying on these statements, I'm removing the category "Doctors convicted of murdering their patients" as inaccurate. Is there a category for doctors who murdered their patients and got away with it? Pirate Dan 21:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if anyone has noticed, but if the second link under the External Links section, "A timeline of his life", is accessed, 2 popups windows appear. The guidelines set out in Wikipedia state that it's advisable to warn people of the popup windows. Would it be better to delete the link in question and provide another one with similiar information? I'm happy to do this. --Rjwd 04:08, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The article states, "Almost all of Mengele's experiments were of dubious scientific value." Are there any that weren't?

Probably none of Mengele's experiments, but it is important to note that some of the military science experiments carried out at other camps, such as Dachau, although barbaric and cruel, had some scientific and medical merit. These were mainly carried out by the Luftwaffe in order to help save pilots in different circumstances, such as being shot down over cold water or having to bail out. These included subjecting victims to extreme temperatures such as ice baths for extended periods of time, then reviving them. If i'm not mistaken, the current medically accepted method for treating hypothermia was derived from one of these Nazi experiments. Other experiments with altitude chambers helped to illustrate the effects of hypoxia and pressure changes at extreme altitudes on the human body. Again, these experiments inflicted great pain and suffering on innocent victims and are in no way justified, but data was gathered, and I believe it was used for some good. If anyone else knows about this please chime in and let me know, or correct any errors.

mention slayer?

To me it does not look sensible to mention a band which refers to Mengele in a song. This page is about the person Mengele not about where he was mentioned, I think. What is your opinion on this? Besserwissi 17:14, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The article has a section called "In film and literature", so I guess mentioning the Slayer song there is ok if I add music to the section title? I'll do that. --Kerror 16:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Besserwissi above. I don't like adding stuff like this to a serious article. I think it detracts rather than adds to the article's value. --Guinnog 16:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


I'm just interested, are there standards on Wikipedia for when to use a first name or a last name, or both, including a title, etc. These things can add a certain tone to any article so I think it's a pertinant question.


thumb|right|Josef Mengele

This photo was added but it does not disclose Copyright details. I'm reverting to the previous photo.--AI 22:45, 12 May 2005 (UTC)


I seem to remember hearing that Mengele contributed greatly to gynecology. Can anyone confirm or deny this? -GregoryWeir 16:29, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Mengele made no contributions whatsoever to medical science. He was nothing but a butcher.
    • That's a matter of opinion.

--In that case shouldn't the article address the popular myth that some of Mengele's experiments contributed great things to human knowledge? So many people seem to believe this. Could someone who knows better than I do try and refute (or support?) this claim?

Such as? Link9er 15:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
How gruesome his work may have been, it did contribute to the understanding of genetics. Lord Metroid 11:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Seems to me that saying Mengele "contributed greatly to gynecology" is like saying Ted Bundy contributed greatly to the understanding of women's anatomy. After all, he hacked up women to see what the experience was like as well. And wasn't Bundy reputed to be "smart and charming" too? Josef Mengele was a serial killer with all the freight that that carries. He was assigned to a concentration camp as a "doctor" because he fit the profile they were looking for. In other words, he was perfect for the job and went at it with glee. Stick him in another era in another decade...he'd be just another Ted Bundy, or John Wayne Gacey, or Albert Fish or Jeffrey Dahmer or............. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:44, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

My Changes to the Article

Good afternoon I just wanted to say I am from the São Paolo area of Brasil pretty close to where Dr. Mengele was living before he died I just made some minor changes to the article such as the more precise location of his exile. I mean we have São Paolo "State" (which is huge like 40m people) and São Paolo "City" just like you guys have New York State and New York City so it's more accurate to say that he was living in Embu Brazil which is a city about 40 km West-South West of São Paolo city. Embu is really really cool and is known around here for its artistic community. Also I remember that when he drowned he wasn't swimming in the ocean which is more like like the beaches south and east of São Paolo but the beach in Embu is more like a bay or inlet type thing.

I think it's important to know that he pretty much lived openly in Brazil among his friends at least and was said to have liked it here for its tranquil and friendly attitude (as does everyone actually). In response to an above user he didn't always work at medical jobs I know that he was a factory supervisor in southern Brazil in the early 1970s for instance. I have a minor personal tie in to this since one of my (girl)friends claims to have met him when she was a little girl. Her family is of German descent and her father was a pretty bad guy overall. And there are a lot of Germans here in São Paolo region I mean they even have their own newspaper here printed in German.

I think it's amazing you'd actually admit this. I think it's amazing that you would consider Mengele's enjoyment of your community a source of pride. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Just thought i'd add local perspective to this please let me know if you all have any discussions.Wiki brah 20:16, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

I find it rather shocking that anyone knowing who he was failed to report him to the authorities. This is a very deep shame on the people of Embu.


It was from certain letters seized in Brazil in 1985. Then rediscovered amongst files held in Sao Paolo in 2004.


What exactly killed this guy? It said in the link that he died an accidental death, but does anyone know what specifically killed him?

Article states that he died from a stroke while swimming (he ended up drowning). Flyerhell 09:52, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Does anyone know what evidence there is for the fact he actually had a stroke? Was a full autopsy done? Who conducted it? Etc etc... I'm just wondering because given who we are talking about, it wouldn't seem surprising if he was murdered/extrajudicially executed. We would probably never know since one would expect even if a full autotopsy were done, there is a good chance they weren't looking for drugs that could have been used to induce a stroke for example and other shortcomings not uncommong when a murder is completely not expected Nil Einne 13:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Discovery Civilisation's T.V. episode "Hunting Nazi's" also says that he died from a stroke. Not that this leads to anything conclusive, but shouldn't this wiki article mention something along those lines? I mean, I wouldn't say that someone drowned accidentally if they had a stroke in the pool and couldn't get themselves out. 5 August 2007.

Regarding Mengele's alleged daughter

The article contains the following claim: "...Mengele has a daughter born to an Australian woman of German lineage after a liaison between the two when the woman, aged 23, visited the German Colony Colonia Independencia in Paraguay in mid-1960 along with her mother and brother..." What is the specific source for this claim? Is it a reliable source? Has it been verified? Is this reliable information? It is really necessary to supply a reference on this point. I have never read any such claim about Mengele in any other biography. Unsubstantiated internet gossip (of which there is plenty in this regard)can't be represented as fact.

There a numerous Forum posts statting this as fact and making reference to this very article in wikipedia as evidence of it being true!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

There have been specific sources added to this section since the abovementioned queries. Hope this helps.

...I don't understand why the source re Mengele's daughter has been taken away. The person who omitted it left no explanation. The source is clearly reliable. I am rewriting it. If the person who omitted it has a problem, then please explain it, or please leave source as is. I believe that is the correct thing to do here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:23, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

'In 1939, Mengele married his first wife, Sofie Shoinbaeum-Edelstein, from which union issued a single offspring, Rebecca ("Becky") Edelstein who resides to this day in Los Angeles.' ... can somebody clarify this? Was it not Irene Schoenbein who he married in 1939?

This sounds like a nasty joke played on the person referred to as "Becky Edelstein", who is probably a real person of Jewish origin. Mengele's first wife was, indeed, Irene Schoenbein. His second wife was his deceased brother's ex-wife, Martha.

Mengele - A"Nazi Leader"?

Can Mengele be accurately categorized as a "Nazi leader"? He wasn't exactly part of the core leadership of the Nazi state. -Kingsbury 20:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

i agree, mengele was not a Nazi leader, war criminal might be more helpful categorytrueblood 21:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Personally selected over 400000 ...

I don't think this is phrased correctly. It sounds a bit like he personally chose, one by one, 400,000 individuals in 21 months. Surely he must have chosen certain critera, or selected blocks of individuals, for otherwise choosing people to die 12 hours a day for 21 months of about 30 days (i.e. 400 000 / (21 * 30 * 12) = 53) he would have been choosing one person a minute 7 days a week for nearly two years. I don't have particular historical knowledge of this evil man. Could someone correct this? i.e., explain the selection process very briefly, or change it to "supervised" or "was ultimately responsible for ...". Sorry to be picky about such an issue, but any engineer reading that statement immediately reaches for his trusty HP calculator to see if it is reasonable.

What does the word "selected" mean in this context?

When the trains would come into Auschwitz, the people were lined up and separated, the fit were sent to slave labor, and the people who were unfit for labor were sent to be killed,that process was called the selection. Mengele was responsible for the selection at Auschwitz, and with the point of his finger sent over 400,000 Jews to their deaths.

Not only jews! That phrase don´t do justice to the "forgotten victims" like homosexuals, sinti and roma, gypsys and so on.

I thought Irma Grese was hung for selecting victims. If Mengele selected people according to health and war industry skills he would still be in Poland trying to sort out the first day's worth of arrivals - some story just don't cut it. 14:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Mengele and the selection of 400,000

Mengele alone did not select 400,000 victims for the gas chambers. The following civilian and SS doctors also served at Auschwitz with Mengele and are known to have, or were likely to have participated in selections:

Dr Carl Clauberg Dr Arnold Dohmen SS Hauptsturmführer Dr Friedrich - Karl Entress Dr Kurt Gutzeit SS Hauptsturmführer Dr Willy Jobst SS Obersturmführer Dr Bruno Kitt SS Hauptsturmführer Dr Fritz Klein SS Untersturmführer Dr Hans - Wilhelm König SS Hauptsturmführer Dr Eduard Krebsbach SS Untersturmführer Dr Johannes Kremer SS Obersturmführer Dr Franz Lucas Female SS Oberaufseherinen Dr Maria Mandel SS Hauptsturmführer Dr Josef Mengele SS Obersturmführer Dr Hans Munch SS Obersturmführer Dr Werner Rohde SS Sturmbannführer Dr Horst Schumann SS Obersturmführer Dr Horst Thilo SS Hauptsturmführer Dr Alfred Trzebinski SS Hauptsturmführer Dr Helmuth Vetter SS Hauptsturmführer Dr Eduard Wirths

Kingsbury 23:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Anon. Comment:

I read about everything is about WWII i can get my hands on, esspecially what happend to the nazi war criminals, and i must say, this is the first time i see somebody wants not to be omitted the qualities of J. Mengele! i find this simplly outrageous! however, i am not surprised. if only after e few years after the ending of the war, people not only didn't care anymore what happend to those horrible people who one way or another managed to escape Germany and lived a nice, simple life in some warm, most likely comunist cuntry, but also started to think and to persuade others tahat the nazi atrocities were...exagerated! and the poor nazi 'war heroes' were being thought at as if they were evil, or criminals... if this things were happening after only 7-10 years after the war, what can we espect today, after more than 50 years?

i can't understand how the 'good side' of this vicious murderers can even come in question! i don't know who wrote the first comment here, but you should understand that thise ...people (if we can call them so) killed millions of people, only because they were not germans, or because they were jews, gipseys, hungarian, pole, czech, etc. mengele&co choosed what they wnted to do in their lives, they choosed to be nazi and they choosed to kill inocent people! you sy we should not 'omit' Mengele's intelligence; what intellgence?? IS his passionate belief in the superiority of the scandinavians? How can an intelligent human being belive that the other nations must be eliminated? sombody here said he was paid off by the Allies for his... research... do you know what he was doing in Auschwitz? His main goal was that of obteining on artificial ways blond and blue-eyed children.he was the one who in 1944 decided who among the thousands of hungarians from Auschwitz would die and who waould live. As far as i know, he especially hated the gipseys -perhaps because he looked like one- and he masacrated them.

my deepest sorrow concerning mengele's life -exept the fact that he had one in the first place- is that he was not found and that he died as a free man. i like to thik it's true that he became more an more obsessed of his hunters and even paranoid in his late years. i also hope he had a miserable life in South America...

i'd like to conclude with annother hope: that we will no longer foerget history's role, that of constantly remembering us what truly happend. we must not ever alloud us to forget... we must allways remember!!!

Firstly you're responding to the wrong section, you should respond to the right section so people know what you're talking about. Secondly, please learn to format your message properly. The way you've formatted it makes it very difficult to read.
Okay in response to what you're saying well, firstly, while I didn't write the early message, I agree with it more then I agree with you. Whether you like it or not, most of the people reponsible for the atrocities are not one dimensional villans who are a manifestation of pure evil as some people like to believe and that is common of villians on TV. Most of them are fairly complex characters. It is important to understand these complexities. For example Hitler's vegetarinism and the reasons he choose it are rather interesting and reveal this man commonly seen as the ultimate manisetation of pure evil is not as simple as many seem to like to believe. Censoring or hiding these complexities simply because you wish to think of these people as one dimensional evil people is unnacceptable and harmful. Only when we understand history can we avoid repeating it. Treating the people involved as evil villians full stop stops us from properly understanding history. IMHO, this is a great offense to the many many victims of the holocaust. They're deaths, as with their the deaths of many people all over the world can at least have some positives if we learn from their deaths. Sadly, for whatever reason, some people don't appear to want to learn anything. Nil Einne 13:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

So what if Hitler was a vegetarian? How does that make him exceptional or less culpable, or less cruel or less criminal or less of a maniac? I have yet to understand why his preference for veggies to meat makes this man sympathetic. Get real. It's YOU who doesn't want to see the man for what he was; a psychopath who orchestrated the murder of millions of people.

Hitler’s diaries??

I have difficulties with the quotes in the article from Hitler’s diaries (Hitler came into direct telephonic contact with Mengele many times. In his diaries he reveals: "No man is closer to my heart at the moment than this obscure KZ Lager physician, Herr Gnädiger Doktor Josef Mengele, who embodies every ideal of German manhood I have ever imagined in my life. I feel that I owe my life to him. Certainly all German people do owe their lives to him until the war ends.").

As far as I know “Hitler’s Diaries” is a known hoax. This quote could not be genuine. Also, why would Hitler believe the he (and the German people) owes his life to a lowly concentration-camp doctor? That the two of them were responsible for monstrous crimes against humanity does not mean that they’ve met or developed a personal relationship. I’ve never heard any evidence other than this supposed diary entry that would suggest this relationship. Dr. Death was what they called him.

I agree, Hitler's diaries were a hoax, the quotation should be removed

some text identical to referenced link

A good deal of the article text is identical to the text in the article (linked!) at The Crime Library[2]. The Crime Library article has a named author[3] but Wikipedia is not listed in the bibliography[4]. TCL contains copyrighted material which is why I am noting it here. If this is an issue, someone may like to look into it.


i think the introduction needs a rewrite. it should mention ss membership, his exact position in auschwitz, a sentence or two about the selection , his experiments and the ideology they were based on. his escape two south america and accidental death, name angel of death.

the whole sentence : " This demented effort caused him to work virtually twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, while he pursued his extensive experimentations and carried out his heavily burdensome duties as medical doctor" is just plain weird.

i find the attributed quote not helpful and neither the reference to hitler's 'big lie'. more important is his racist ideology that he based his pseudo scientific research on.

ah and his nickname was beppo, very charming that. trueblood 22:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

i deleted : -the quotation and the big lie, because it sounds somewhat unlikely. at least mengele probably believed in what he was doing, this sounds more like something from machiavelli. if someone wants it back, it needs to be referenced

second and third section

the second section is lenghty and contains unnecessary information (his disease) maybe his university career could be put in the third section under another headline that discribes his involvement with the nazi movement (memebership of stahlhelm,nsdap, ss) as well as his ideological development. the link between what it meant to study anthropology in nazi germany and with that tutor and his later twin research should be made clear. military service should be mentioned but the whole paragraph about his war bravery is somewhat misleading. trueblood 22:53, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

deleted quote from holocaust denial link

i just deleted for the second time a section that is out of place, misleading and from a sort of holocaust denial web page that for instance also runs it's own holocaust cartoon contest. check out the cartoons. please don't revert this deletion. trueblood 23:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC) "The German delousing chambers with only minor modifications -- and the large railroad tunnels without any modification at all -- would have served the purpose of mass murder perfectly well, but they were used only to keep people alive. The great killer was disease. The Degesch delousing chambers, the railroad delousing tunnels, and Zyklon B were essential to keeping disease, especially typhus, under control." a little quote from the same web page... trueblood 23:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

i deleted first and second chapter headings: because the chapter military career contains other information as well. also his military career is simply not relevant enough to be in need of an own paragraph. lots of people spend time in the army, needs mentioning okay but if it is through something else that they become famous, mentioning is enough. trueblood 10:29, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Would you mind giving us the link to that web page/article? Id like to see the entire text instead of having to judge it based on half a paragraph. Besides, can't exactly say I'm not curious about what you call a holocaust cartoon contest... JaneDOA

auschwitz section

i wanted to clearify mengeles work in ausschwitz a little bit, particulary that his interest in twins was to be seen in context with his earlier academic work. took two sentences off, one about the nazis being desperate in the difficult days of '44, it seems there other people than nazis whose days were difficult and desperate. second one about mengele being a cult figure with himmler and hitler, which logically did not belong where it was and i wonder if it is a late echo of the deleted fake hitler diary quote trueblood 15:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC) some other changes i made: took out a sentence about the gypsies/ roma because it was twice in the article. Furthermore why mention the hyppocratic oath here, that would be true for any physician.

i also would like to take off the boiling water and sewing together thing unless someone can verify that. trueblood 14:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe the oath must be there for emphasis. JaneDOA

Ovitz family

I took off some confused sounding sentences (and what seemed to me another try to twist some information to make it sound somewhat positive). According to wikipedia article Mengele did not found the Lilliput troupe, that's what they called themselves. trueblood 14:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

changes in after war section

i deleted:

-the bit about his daughter he never met : because it is just not relevant enough, all this schmu about his deep emotional pain through this loss. please let's be a little bit more tactful. it almost sounds like someone is trying to make fun of his victims.

- nazi leader category because he was not a nazi leader

-a quote and link from a ridiculous pro life site about mengele performing abortions after the war. trueblood 09:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

further pruning

i just looked at the german and the french article and like the some much better for being shorter. i'll try to prune some surplus bits.trueblood 20:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

more pruning

took of again this medal thing. the reference to court tv is not satisfactory. the whole article at the crime library is more about story telling then anything else. it contains several errors. to reinstall it it needs a better reference. trueblood 20:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

please do not just revert pruning

tried some more shortening of the auschwitz paragraph. i think an article does not necessarily benefit from length. we want all the relevant information. do we need to know that he spent six months in some gebirgsjaeger regiment or the name of the guy that found his body? trueblood 21:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

This is an encyclopædia; it is intended to be information-rich!
StationaryTraveller 22:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

yep, you are right, but you also want to make sure that the really relevant information reaches the reader and does not get lost in a sea of random bits of trivia. oh and look at this quote from the wiki article about encyclopedias.

"an encyclopedia treats each subject in more depth and conveys the most relevant accumulated knowledge on that subject or discipline" trueblood 19:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

ah but who decides what is most relevant? Mapetite526 21:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

got me there, how about for a guideline look at other encyclopedias, see what leave out and what not? but after all, since everybody can change everything it is everybody who decides. i just decided to loose a seminal harcore band from i forgot that wrote a song about mengele... trueblood 21:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

In fiction

We could add mention of the Star Trek: Voyager episode Nothing Human, which featured a holographic simulation of the Cardassian Dr. Moset—an obvious parody of Josef Mengele.
StationaryTraveller 22:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC) please don't, see above trueblood 11:07, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Please avoid renegade editing

Significant changes should be discussed back here, before being made. Also, try to make the Talk headings meaningful. "My changes" and such, don't tell us much, when we're looking to see if something has been (or is being) discussed.
StationaryTraveller 23:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

noma in auschwitz section

i don't agree with the recent change, a racist he was, no need to cloud his intentions in pc language. trueblood 11:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

no withwash

the recent edit was just withwash, so i reverted it, i think it is important to state that mengele performed the selections in auschwitz. and why not call what he did crimes. trueblood 18:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

pls read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view --Haham hanuka 21:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

please clarify where exactly the npov policy supports your change. can we call the people that got tried for war crimes in nurnberg war criminals? and the people that got away we can't? and i don't understand why replacing gas chamber with killed. can you give reasons? by the way you repeated the same changes as any chance that it was you, that you signed out to do these changes. i mean there are all kinds of people at wikipedia with all kinds of tasks. you are making sure that people like eichmann, barbie and mengele are not called war criminals. good. respect [User:Trueblood|trueblood]] 06:57, 1 July 2006 (UTC)


I move that the title of Dr. be removed from this creatures name cheifly because the Universities of Munich and Frankfurt revoked his degrees in 1964. But also because Mengeles experiments were of no scientific value. SolitaryWolf 14:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

where does it say dr?trueblood 15:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Most of them have already been removed presumably by another wikipedian editor. However, one reference remains under the subtitle Auschwitz. SolitaryWolf 01:21, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Not objective article

"But also because Mengeles experiments were of no scientific value."

Even though his monstrous experiments are imoral and unethical, you can not say there is no scientific value in his experiments. At the time the experiments were done, there was little knowledge on the fields Mengele studied. This is confirmed by the fact that several international agencies were very interested in the documents that were made of the experiments after the war.

In all, I think this article is too subjectively written. Which is not good for a encyclopedic piece. Try to keep to the facts. If his dr. title was taken away, don't argue about putting it in front of his name, just explain the situation in the article.

hm, what fields that mengele was studying are you refering to? his 'research' was based on a flawed racist worldview not just from a ethical point of view. today the category 'race' does not have any validity in modern science. as for the dr, if his doctor titles were really revoked in the sixties i don't see your problem there either. your fact (several international agencies) to me very much sounds like a urban legend, wanna quote some references for that?[User:Trueblood|trueblood]] 18:00, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
1. "don't argue about putting it in front of his name" - I never was, quite the opposite 2. "Several international agencies" - what are you talking about? I never made that claim. Everything I have written was based on what I had read in the actual article prior to my posting. Nothing is based on a personal worldview or primary research, I will withdraw my comment on the "dubiousness" of his experiments if you like despite the actual claims of the article, but I will not withdraw what I have said about the title of doctor. Chiefly, because in accordance to this article his degrees were revoked in the 60s - For this reason I see no reason why he should be given the title of "Dr" throughout the article - it is 2006. If anything I'm disputing the articles architecture, not its factual integrity. Finally, I'll point out that I never made any alterations to the actual article, I merely put forth a point for discussion - SolitaryWolf 05:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Trying to claim this is "subjective" is ludicrous. Read Baumslag and Weindling for your answer. For example, Mengele injected dye into children's eyes to see if he could change their eye color. By no stretch of the imagination would that be an experiment of any scientific value. Mengele also removed organs and limbs just to see what would happen to the victims. Again, not a valid scientific experiment. Mengele would also shock people with increasingly higher voltages just to see what would happen, another invalid scientific experiment. 23:37, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Horrible experiments but even so it did contribute to the knowledge of the body and heritage. Science does not work like this have value this have no value. Science or rather knowledge did increase if even so that this is no good to do to a person or this is how much a person can take of this before it dies. Knowledge is only knowledge, knowledge doesn't have value in itself but only when it then is applied it gains valuable information to the application. Lord Metroid 18:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

It is a terrible but all too prevalent urban myth that Mengele's research yielded knowledge. His experiments were ideologically biased to a degree that the results did not adhere to any accepted scientific methodology. It is incomprehensible to me how people can claim that a man provided insight into genetics who sewed twins together to turn them into Siamese twins. The Mendel laws of heredity were already common knowledge at the time and should have made it clear that the experiments were base slaughter without scientific basis.

Mr. Metroid, you need to tell everyone exactly HOW these "experiments" contributed to scientific knowledge and cite your evidence. Otherwise you come off sounding like an absolute jackass. Also, if you'd learn to write a cohesive sentence in English, that might help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

deleted major additions

i deleted the whole postwar additions, whoever wants to publish a trash novel on mengele's postwar life should do it somewhere else.trueblood 18:36, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Grandson link?

Why is there an external link to Josef Mengele's grandson's Youtube page? It dosen't seem to have any value to the article. -Kerplunk- 22:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't have an opinion on this, but I just wanted to say I think his grandson is funny as hell. But he never speaks about his grandfather. Neither does any living Mengele family member. --Arislan 10:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually, now that I think about it, I think the deletion of a link relevant to the subject of an article should be discussed.--Arislan 21:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I vote for the YouTube link to be deleted. It seems to add very little to the article.--Tabun1015 19:39, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Where's the source of Christian being Josef's grandson? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


In the above discussion "mention slayer", the user 'Besserwissi' stated:

  • "To me it does not look sensible to mention a band which refers to Mengele in a song. This page is about the person Mengele not about where he was mentioned, I think. What is your opinion on this? Besserwissi 17:14, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)"

Another user, 'Guinnog', agreed. I can see where you are coming from and that's fair enough. However, if this is a "page is about the person Mengele not about where he was mentioned" then why is one of the 'In film and literature' enteries allowed to be:

  • "Mengele is briefly mentioned in Elie Wiesel's book Night."

That contradicts 'Besserwissi's very guidelines for that section. So I proposed it is either removed or the title be changed to allow musical references as well. Besides, I think a song written entirely about Josef Mengele is more worthy of being on the list than something that 'briefly mentions' him.

~ Brettus.

baby, slayer and elie wiesel are just not in the same category. night is the account of someone who survived auschwitz, it is world literature. slayer on the other hand, if you wandered what slayer's cultural relevance outside metal fan circles, um i'd say none.

trueblood 21:45, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

> Oh, I'm not part of the Slayer argument, I don't even know what song that is. I'm purely pointing out that according to 'Besserwissi's guidelines for that section, that that piece of trivia shouldn't be there. It's supposedly a page "about the person Mengele not about where he was mentioned", and that very trivia entry says "briefly mentioned". You see what I'm saying yeah?

~ Brettus. 29/01/07

I not part of the slayer argument but I think that Mengele should be mentioned more and he is just mentioned a couple of times. But if you visit this page please visit my page. Click Here


In film and literature examples

The example I added here, regarding Mengele being mentioned in the movie "Anatomy", has been removed for the second time. If something like that isn't considered notable enough to be mentioned here, that is fine, but I don't see how that is any less relevant than most of the other items on this list which give mentions of Mengele in fiction, especially examples that claim that a certain character might be "based off of" Mengele (such as the references to "Marathon Man" and "Time's Arrow"). If my example isn't included, that's okay with me, but then I think that other, less relevant, examples should also be considered for removal. Has anyone created any guidelines for what should and shouldn't be included in sections such as this? If not, then I think that they should be discussed, since "Trivia" and "In fiction" sections can be a large gray area.--Tabun1015 14:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

mengele is important enough to the plots of both time's arrow and marathon man that his name is mentioned in the wiki articles. both books are actually about the holocaust or about mengeles life , and so are all other references. trueblood 07:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Ok--Tabun1015 16:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Quote trueblood: "mengele is important enough to the plots of both time's arrow and marathon man that his name is mentioned in the wiki articles. both books are actually about the holocaust or about mengeles life , and so are all other references." ok, so again if its ok to include these, then Angel of Death by Slayer should be included as (and i quote YOU trueblood) "..are actually about the holocoust or about mengele's life..." check. oh, and is there any reason why you have final say on absolutely everything in this article? Dark_wounds. 5th March 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Re. repeat deletions of "Camouflage" novel

The novel "Camouflage" has been repeatedly deleted from the literary references section, with no rational explanation. The novel is noteworthy, as it won the best novel of the year award from science fiction's most prestigious awards, the Nebulas, a couple years ago, and was written by a multiple award-winning and best-selling author. The reference is also far more direct than most of the other literary references, most of which indicate Mengele is briefly mentioned, or that a character is or might possibly be modeled after him, while he appears directly as a character in Camouflage and one of the main characters interacts with him over a period of years, including before, during, and after WWII. If anyone wants to forward a rational reason why Camouflage shouldn't be listed, please lay out the explanation here for discussion prior to another deletion. Thanks. - Reaverdrop (talk/nl/w:s) 20:44, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

The Slayer controversy - mention or not?

I have added a section regarding the Slayer's song Angel of Death. I think that, despite it is a serious article, it can be mentioned here if an information regarding the song's controversy of alleged lack of condemnation is added as I did when writing a section.

I personaly think it's a good thing. Yet why not merge the different aspects (Film / Literature / Music) in one section. Like "In Popular Culture" or so. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 23:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC).

I've augmented the info on Slayer... I don't understand why people say it should not be included due to a "lack of seriousness". Of what exactly? The song? Heavy metal as an entire genre? Let's not become snobbish round here. This piece of music is incredibly serious, and totally relevant to the article. (MetalA)

I'm going to re-add the information, since it is just as relevent as a character from a film (Marathon Man) being based on him. DarkSaber2k 11:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Seems a bit ridiculous that the Slayer song (which is provable by multiple sources) is rmeoved for no apparant reason, but an unsourced seemingly original research entry like

  • Dr Emmenberger, a Nazi doctor in Friedrich Dürrenmatt's book Der Verdacht (translated as Suspicion or The Quarry), is probably a fictionalized and symbolic version of Mengele.

is deemed perfectly acceptable. 11:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


Why is there so little about his military service on the eastern front? Was he awarded these medals for Propaganda/Political Reasons or did he legitimately earn them? If he did in fact go above and beyond the call of duty (no matter who he fought for) what were his actions? I feel this is relevant because the whole point of reading the article is to get a sense of mengele as a man. If we portray him solely as a monster don't we run the risk of repeating history? If only monsters commit atrocities then we cannot recognize potential for evil in men. Also very little about his post WW2 life and death surley what he did after the fall of berlin is just as important as before.

About Noma and race.

Is there some reference that backs up the claim that as a scientist Dr. Mengele would have been naive enough to believe that Noma was related to race? 22:46, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

The citations for this piece of fantasy involve a movie database and the holocaust history site. No comment on the movie other than "really, you aren't kidding are you" but the hh project gives an uncited blurb with a list of books you can read for more info. Most of the books end up in a circular referencing - you reference me and I'll reference you. Other than a few witnesses is their any real inforamtion about Mengele? I haven't seen anything - all seems to be built on a handful of stories from what appears to be well-treated survivors 9 no signs of experiments on them - just others they tell about ).Any German army archives, etc on him? 14:15, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Interesting how odd things like NOMA and gypsies pop up. NOMA wasn't racist but it was endemic in gypsies - particularly children. Mengele deduced ( correctly?) that it was congenital syphilis - common in some cultures. Mengele developed a fairly efficient treatment for the disease ( at least the symptoms - penicillin has pretty much eradicated the problem today ). His interest in gypsies seems to be of a research nature more than the bloodthirsty tales we have grown up with. The dull NOMA research is documented but the blood and guts Mengele isn't very well documented ( except for your ever present handful of witnesses ). I wont bother with any citations _ I would have to go back and rebrowse but you could, and probably have the citation on a card already - but it would change the story way to much for wiki. This info will have to seep in gradually over time, prepare your nreves because it can't be stopped. 14:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

after war and death section

i replaced the recent sections with an earlier version that all the necessary info and none of the storytelling elements and superfluous german words sprinkled in, i don't even know why the earlier version got deleted, undetected vandalism maybe trueblood 15:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

"Stehlend ist verboten!"

As far as I know it was not common during the third Reich, as well as in this time, to use "stehlend" instead of "Stehlen". It should actually mean "Stehlen ist verboten!". "Stehlend" could be used in a sentence like this: "Er ging stehlend durchs Leben" (He went through life stealing things).

Contradiction about Mengele's whereabouts

In the section about his flight, it says:

In 1959 he fled to Altos, Paraguay, when his address was discovered by Nazi hunters. Martha never managed to adjust to her new life and returned to Europe with her son. Mengele later moved south to Hohenau and from the late 1960s he lived in Embu, a small city near São Paulo, Brazil.

I don't get it. Did he return to Germany from Paraguay only to leave again for South America? --Ben T/C 19:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

His wife and son went back to europe. He didn't because he would have been caught and Hanged.(Morcus (talk) 01:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC))

I knew Peter Hochbichler, in the 60 years, he lives on a farm 4 km out of embu and itapecerica da serra, whith a woman and two child ( females ). I knew him and learn with him about the life. Today I´m a medical doctor in Brasil probably by his influence. I´m today 54 years old, in this time onli 11 to 13 yers old. He died in Peruíbe , sao paulo strand, and was find in de cemitery of Itapecerica da serra.

From an unregistered user: I recently added a little blurb about Mengele living in the Itapua deparment of Paraguay, on the edge of Hohenau, having visited his home in the area not two weeks ago and it was promptly deleted with no explanation given. There's an NY Times article attesting to the fact that he lived there, I don't know if others thought it was just vandalism or what. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:39, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Eichman's life after the war

Why does this article say little or nothing about Eichman's life after the war? Would anyone be willing to add this information? In particular, I think someone should write about his death and his attempted capture by the Israelis. User:Notecardforfree May 8, 2007

Try Adolf Eichmann. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 10:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

What happened to the Nazi photo?

In uniform? Much more revelant. --HanzoHattori 17:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

It was deleted and I restored it. I agree it is much better than the other one. I have left both up for now. --Guinnog 18:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Documentary sources

Are there any direct documentary sources about Dr. Mengele doing human experiments? Even experiments on animals were forbidden in the Third Reich. Allegations of human experimantation come exclusively from supposed witnesses to the best of my knowledge. There is no other proof. And witnesses are not always the best source, many allegations made by "witnesses" were in fact by the time proven as false even by official historians, such as the "gas chamber at Dachau" or "human soap myth", not to mention the "25 million dead at Treblinka"...

Therefore, I urge for some documentation supplementary to this article, because the sources seem to be rather biased and uncertain.

-Is the testemony of Eva Mozes Kor and his other victims not enough for you? Tsel 03:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

In film, literature and music

I do not think this section is justifiable in its present form. I wonder if we can either shorten it or eliminate it entirely. Thoughts? --John 16:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I've moved it here in the meantime. --John 16:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

In film, literature and music

What Pharmaceutial Company in 1955 did he purchase 50% ownership? 04:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Information found in The House on Garbaldi Street by Isser Harel

-Mengele was a secondary target of the Mossad operation that captured Eichmann in Argentina in 1960. - The article mentions that Mengele "got to know other Germans such as Hans-Ulrich Rudel and Adolf Eichmann". It should be mentioned that Eichmann was interrogated on Mengele's whereabouts and at first denied knowing any information and then later revealed that Mengele had lived in Buenos Aires until a couple weeks before Eichmanns' capture (May 1960) therefore Mengele must have moved to Paraguay sometime in April 1960 and not 1959 as mentioned in the article. In the book a postman is quoted to have said that Mengele lived in Buenos Aires until a couple weeks before Eichmanns capture (page 197). - During his stay in Buenos Aires Mengele lived in a boardinghouse run by a German woman (Mrs. Jurmann). - In Buenos Aires Mengele occasionally called himself Mr. Gregor. -Mengle had two or three lathes which he used for his profession as a metal worker in the Northern Buenos Aires province of Vincente Lopez. aliasfoxtrot —Preceding comment was added at 07:10, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

In popular culture

Restored a part of the article that was removed by John. Many other articles about major German WW2 personalities (Himmler, Hitler, etc) have sections that are in the same vein. Might as well have removed those while you were at it, John. (talk) 23:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

That was a lousy argument for restoring it. I saw nothing woth keeping and still don't --John (talk) 00:01, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't really see you making any worthwhile counter-arguments. Rewrite it if you must, but don't remove it for purely personal reasons. (talk) 15:28, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
The section could indeed use a good trimming. Tchernobog (talk) 12:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
i was so happy tosee this section gone, why was it put back, you cannot keep it short, i already tried to trim it some time back. trueblood (talk) 18:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
if i might quote wp: trivia sections  : Sections with lists of miscellaneous information (such as "trivia" sections) should be avoided as an article develops. Such information is better presented in an organized way.trueblood (talk) 18:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
on second thoughts i put the list back but trimmed it. deleted the boys from brazil, because it is already mentioned in the article and all points that refer to books etc where mengele is briefly mentioned.trueblood (talk) 18:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Mengele an Abortionist, Argentine Files Suggest

New York Times, By NATHANIEL C. NASH, Published: February 11, 1992

Something about this ought to be put in this article. NY Times is a reputable source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy120 (talkcontribs) 17:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Hitler's account?

"Adolf Hitler's account of his time in Auschwitz details certain experiments performed on female prisoners around October 1943, Mengele would experiment on the chosen girls, performing sterilization and shock treatments." - ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Hitler in Auschwitz?

"Adolf Hitler's account of his time in Auschwitz details certain experiments performed on female prisoners around October 1943..."

Hitler has never been to any of the camps. This seems like vandalism; I'm surprised how long this has been written on the article without anyone noticing. --Grimgerde (talk) 04:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Dwarf gassing

I have the removed the sentence relating to their avoidance of the gas chambers. Holocaust deniers frequently cite their claims to try and negate the entire Holocaust, and so did the source which cited the aforementioned sentence, thus I have removed it. Unless anyone can provide reliably sourced material that explains how they managed to survive exposure to cyanide in a homicidal gas chamber, this has no place in this article. WilliamH (talk) 14:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

They don't state they survived gassing, it says they were removed before gassing, it is a reliable article, it's a newspaper article. I'm putting it back. Silent52 (talk) 23:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Uh, no. Adelaide Institute, like all holocaust denial organizations, is by definition an unreliable source, and may not be cited except in an article about itself. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
But i'm not citing them, i'm citing a newspaper article they've hosted. So by rights if i find the original article then it's valid, under what basis does it change? Silent52 (talk) 20:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Sure, if you find the original article,this particular objection disappears. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Mengele is possibly still alive

They forged his DNA test. I really don't think he drowned in 1979. The officials wanted to put an end on the Mengele case, that's why they forged the evidence of his death. His family never wanted his bones back. Why not? Because HE IS STILL ALIVE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

  • It wasn't just DNA. The exhumed body's dentition was compared with Mengele's dental chart, signs of injury he picked up in a motorcycle accident were apparent on the body, and skull damage of the corpse corresponded to skull damage Mengele received when fighting on the eastern front. All these concluded that the exhumed body was indeed Mengele. If you contribute to this article, please consider the necessity of using full, accurate and reliable citations. Thanks. Also please consider that if Mengele was alive today, he'd be 97. WilliamH (talk) 00:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Gymnasium isn't equivicol to High School

As above. I'm removing the note that says it is as a. its not true and b. the Gymnasium article explains what it is.(Morcus (talk) 01:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC))

That should be changed too for his university degrees. The article says he recieved doctorate (Ph. D.). This is unlikely, as german doctorates are normally not called ph.d., although being doctoral degrees. His doctorate in medicine (called M.D. in the article), could also be looked into). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Unit 731 in the infobox?

The infobox at the beginning of the arcticle states that Mengele's unit was 731. I find it a very strange coincidence that the Japanese human experimentetion unit's number was 731 as well. Does anybody have a source for Mengele's unit number or we're dealing with a misunderstanding/very subtle vandalism attempt? -- (talk) 09:38, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The preceding comment came from me. Unable to find any information on Mengele's unit number, I removed Unit 731 from the infobox. It must have been a misunderstanding. --Azazell0 (talk) 16:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


In 1931, at the age of 20, Mengele joined the Devin Motoc FORCE, a paramilitary organization, which was incorporated into the SA in 1933.

Can someone with access revert Devin Motoc FORCE back to Stahlhelm, please? It looks ridiculous. --J3d3md4ss3in3 (talk) 07:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Pregnancy rate

Pregnancy rate needs to be changed to 1 in 10, not 1 in 5. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:33, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Science fiction or science Maybe Mengele just used artificial insemination with a syringe, using some Nordic material?--Revery (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid lots of the stuff claimed in the article is merely unsubstantiated science fiction. -- (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

It is impossible to have a neutral view of Herr Mengele, I hope that there is a special place in hell for him. I am part Jew and Part German and both of those parts despise him for how he ruined Deutchland.Griffonclaw (talk) 20:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)griffinclaw

so, dumb instead of fighting the typhus emedemic that plagued the camp, the was busy injecting peoples eyeballs with things to change the color? its is SO EASY to defame a man after he is dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

"Mengele's experiments also included attempts to take one twin's eyeballs and attach them to the back of the other twin's head"

Uncited, I might add. So you're telling me that one of the leading scientists in German had such a debt of scientific knowledge that he actually thought you could sew eyeballs onto random body parts and have them work? Mengele was a monster, but he wasn't an idiot. This article is a joke and a haven for obvious vandals. (talk) 10:06, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

I've removed it, since it's uncited and, as you say, unlikely. Thanks for spotting it. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 10:11, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Pharmaceutical Company?

Does anyone know the name of the company he bought 50% of in 1955? Very interested; if anyone has any info please let me know, or publish it here. Bblakeney (talk) 20:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Mengele: the Angel of Death in South America

There is a new book coming out by Argentine historian Jorge Camarasa, a specialist in the post-war Nazi flight to South America in which he claims the experiments were continued in south america:

easytiger (talk) 11:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

The mention to the farm being 186 meters from Sao Paulo does not make any sense —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Archived Talk Page

I archived everything older than 2 months.--Adam in MO Talk 00:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Early life

I recall reading somewhere that as a medical student, Mengele studied under doctors/professors who were implicated in medical experimentation and genocide on the Herero's back in the very early 20th century. I'll see if I can find the reference. Does anyone else know anything about this? Fainites barleyscribs 10:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I also find the article to be significantly lacking in describing his life prior to the Nazi deathcamps. __meco (talk) 10:59, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Someone made wholesale deletions on that part of the article back in April. FeygeleGoy/פֿײגעלע גױ‎ (talk) 02:22, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

it needs more info on what he did to the people in the camps —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the current article is rather weak. There needs to be more material about his early life and also his pre-Auschwitz war service. Wasn't he a doctor attached to the SS Wiking division? Tchernobog (talk) 21:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the part about Mengele's involvement with Herero experiments can be true as he was born in 1911 and Germany lost its colonies after the First World War, so he wouldn't have been old enough to be involved in any. Epa101 (talk) 21:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)


Dr. Mengele's grandson Christian Mengele is an artist living in Hollywood and also uses the family name publicly.

What is the source? He never states this on his website or blog. -- (talk) 11:28, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

--I had the same question. I too did not note any assertion that he was related to the infamous doctor. To my knowledge, Josef Mengele had only one son. Therefore, if this assertion is true, then I assume Rolf was his father. Does anyone know if Rolf had one or more sons? Was this assertion part of the original article or was it later added? I'm not making any accusations, but certain thoughts come to mind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HistoryBuff14 (talkcontribs) 00:37, 16 May 2009 (UTC) Ohhh


Clearly 'his marriage ... in 1958' would arouse suspicions he was still alive, if they knew about it. The phrasing is confusing. What was the actual clue that he was alive, and how does it relate to his remarriage? His divorce and remarriage in hiding were clearly not announced to the world, otherwise the statement would fall on the 'duh' side:

'I say my good fellow, did you die in the war?' 'Yes, but I remarried in 1959.' 'Hmm. I find that concatenation of circumstances jolly suspicious, old chap.'

Clearly this doesn't make any sense - some documents must have been found to tip people off. Could someone knowledgeable please rephrase this section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, please remove the offensive word 'thusly' and replace it with 'thus' - it's either bad English or an attempt to be humorous (not approp. here). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

G~ word

"He supervised an operation by which two Gypsy children were sewn together to create conjoined twins; the hands of the children became badly infected where the veins had been resected, this also caused gangrene."

Can the G~ word be changed to Romani, please? Many people consider the use of this word to be rude.

Thank you. (talk) 04:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

"Many people" is a bit of a weasel word/phrase. Tchernobog (talk) 12:44, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Changed. The word "gypsy" is ambiguous, so it is better avoided. Mengele was experimenting on these people because of their race rather than their lifestyle, so "Romanie" is the more appropriate word anyhow. Epa101 (talk) 21:29, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


I've removed the longstanding mention of Josef Mengele's supposed grandson, an American artist. This has been removed many times through the years, but finally a reference has been provided in Gerald Posner's Mengele: the Complete Story. The book looks like it probably passes muster, but no page number was provided so the material cannot be verified. The book is at my library, so when and if the page number is provided I will be checking it out to make sure the information is really in there. At any rate the artist's website does not need to be linked.--Cúchullain t/c 20:11, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


Is there anyone who can confirm a pronunciation for his name? In English, he is normally called mɛŋɘlɘ but I think the German pronunciation is meŋeːlɘ. Can anyone confirm? Epa101 (talk) 12:35, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

House belonged to Martin Borman not Mengele

According to History channels MysteryQuest episode "The Rise of the Fourth Reich" that is the house of Martin Borman not Mengele, Though Mengele did visit his friend there while treating Bormans stomach cancer. I know that Youbue isnt the best of sources but here is the part of the episode that discusses the house on the photo. (talk) 18:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Martin Bormann died in 1945... In Germany. Tchernobog (talk) 18:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

this is a lie research the cia of the united states and you will see that this monster mengele was brought to the us for further human experiments such as mk ultra ,umbrella, ect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

error :)

'anthroplogy' needs to be changed to anthropology :) under "early life" —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Abortion provider

How is listing Mengele as an abortion provider anything other than political/religious snark?

Agreed. He is not notable in that regard. Bus stop (talk) 13:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Can you make the article a bit more thorough?

I really thought the article was good over all but my only critique is that I wish the article had more information about the victims of Josef. I have found on many websites quotes from survivors; if you could find them, incorporate them into your article I bet it would be more helpful for the people who are studying him in class. I also think that maybe you should add some videos from youtube about what Josef Mengele; they are very interesting and gives a lot of info. You might also want to check your sources at the end of the paragraphs. Because I checked one of your sources and no where in that source did I see what you cited from there (this can be seen in when you mentioned how Josef saved some men from a trench and recieved a medal) In a web site that I found it said that most of the information before his time in Auschwitz is innacurate and highly debated because there aren't that many articles on him during this time and a lot of them that are available contradict each other. Oh and maybe you could add more pictures of the victims of Auschwitz. I also believe you should be more discriptive of how Mengele eluded the police and how many places he had to go for them not to find him. As well as how there was a 3.4 million bounty on him (from Germany and I believe Iran for his return). You should also mention that when people where looking for him his wife told many that he was dead which made him very hard to find at the beginning. I also believe you should mention how he died and when they finally found out that they found him. He died while swimming on a vacation in Brazil. He had a stroke in the water and by the time anyone was able to pull him out he was dead. He was burried under the name Wolfgang Gerhard which is why it was so hard for them to find him because he had so many aliases. Below I'm going to attach a few links for you to further your research and maybe make the article even better then what it is already =) I believe one of the sources that I'm going to put down you might already have (when I was going through your sources to see how accurate you were I looked at all of them) but I'm going to post it anyway just because it has some good info. You may also want to watch your plagerism there are a few accounts that you forgot to put quotes around things or cite things when you clearly got them off of a site.

Movies on YouTube about Mengele Part 1 Part2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6

So hopefully these are helpful to you and furthering making this article the best ever =)

(and sorry if all of my critiques seem rather anal I have to critique and write on the discussion board about what you need to critique for extra credit in my class so hopefully you don't find my requests too mean or too anal...I'm just trying to help) =)

Have a nice day! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Howdeyhoo (talkcontribs) 00:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

This paragraph needs some serious cleanup.

Mengele took an interest in physical abnormalities discovered among the arrivals at the concentration camp. Later, Mengele's interests went beyond the concentration camp. In 1969 Michaella Smith was born, the product of incest between Mengele and his trans-sexual sister Adam Sperber-Compean. While in the concentration camps Mengele cooked up some beefy atrocities for fun or as he said "for der lölz." These included dwarfs, notably the Ovitz family - the children of a Romanian artist, of whom seven of the 10 members were dwarfs. Prior to their deportation, they toured in Eastern Europe as the Lilliput Troupe. Mengele often called them "my dwarf family"; to him they seemed to be the perfect expression of "the abnorm".[citation needed]

Seriously? "for der lölz."? The information pertaining to the Ovitz family is the only information in this paragraph that remotely makes sense. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm removing two sentences because one is an Internet meme and the other is an absurd claim that needs to be backed by a source.

The grammar needs cleaning up! That should be "für der lölz." Jeez, people. (talk) 15:43, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Jewish victims omitted

It is amazing that this article avoids any mention of the Jewish victims of the Holocaust and of Mengele in particular. The only mention of Jews in the article is to a Jewish physician who was imprisoned in a death camp and apparently did some legitimate medical research.

Perhaps this omission betrays no agenda, but it is hard to believe. (talk) 02:48, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

What do you want to have in? Do you have any sources? Most of the sources that I have read said that Mengele inflicted his cruelty on the Roma more than any other group, but I have never read any source talking about how he treated Jews differently from his other victims. Epa101 (talk) 11:02, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I doubt this is true

"Josef Mengele was born on 16 March 1911, the eldest of 213 children,[2]"

typo or vandalism? The article itself claims he was the third eldest child anyway... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

physical evidence

what physical evidence exists that he did any experiments on humans? are there any autopsies or records? i think it is amazing what can be said about a man once he is dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:26, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Um, y'know, I mean, it's not like eyewitness account from Auschwitz are enough, are they?! -_-; What a horrible comment to make, and actually, to prove you wrong, there are a number of accounts from Auschwitz, from people who worked with him, to victims, to eyewitnesses. < Gisella Perl worked with Mengele. She has a book about what she experienced in Auschwitz, so before you come here and start running your mouth, check your facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:48, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

People knew this before he died... (talk) 01:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Name on grave

An anon IP added the following to the article. I've moved it here as it's clearly more suitable to the talkpage:

FOOTNOTE When in Embu das Artes recently I made enquiries with the gentleman in charge of the cemetery who showed me Mengele's grave but the name on it was Friderieke Gerhard, Not Wolfgang as reported above. I have no doubt that it was the correct grave because this gentleman knew all about Mengele's history so could any body explain why the name appears to have changed? AVF

The sentence we've currently got for the name 'Wolfgang' has a cite to an NYT piece behind their paywall. Anyone want to investigate? Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 13:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Oddly I can't seem to access the article with my NYT access, but "Wolfgang" is correct. See for example,this. The article currently misses this point, but Wolfgang Gerhard was a real person, a Nazi and a friend of Mengele's in Brazil. He later left the country and Mengele altered his documents for his own use; when Mengele died he was buried as "Wolfgang Gerhard".--Cúchullain t/c 13:43, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Scientific contributions

Does anyone know whether any significant scientific contributions came out of those cruel experiments?

None. Nazi science in these regards was infamously scientifically unrigorous.
The above, unsigned comment is unfortunately unfounded and completely false. In fact, scientific experiments performed in Nazi Germany are often noted for their rigour, and, in fact, experiments on Homeopathy (not done by Mengele) provided some of the first systematic evidence against its effectiveness. Similarly, it appears that at least some of the atrocious, unethical experiments conducted by Mengele have led to important discoveries that otherwise wouldn’t have been possible. I say some because the underlying principle of his research – race theory – is scientifically unsound. But nevertheless, the experiments contained meticulously annotated studies of human physiology. I will try to find notable references and perhaps expand the article, -- (talk) 08:43, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Timeline confusion

I gotta take off, but can someone clean up the timeline bit in the South America section. As it reads Mengele heard about Eichmann and his trial/execution so he moved to Uruguay. Then it proceeds to say he got more anxious in Uruguay when he heard about Eichmann and his trial/execution. Obviously it can't be both. tyvm Pudge MclameO (talk) 21:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

April 2011 Haaretz article

Haaretz - Ofer Aderet - Unraveling the Mengele mystery, 29 April 2011: More than 30 years after the infamous Nazi doctor died under mysterious circumstances, an internal police report reveals just how much effort Israel invested in tracking him down
    ←   ZScarpia   22:52, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Christian Mengele

I removed the reference to Christian Mengele due to the link accessing a blog.keystoneridin! (talk) 02:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Looks like it's back, got reddited. see: — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:57, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The only references to the name Christian Mengele is this blog and the art coming from it. Until we get a source that isn't user-submitted data och a blog I sugest we remove it. Again. (talk) 13:29, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Very persistent. I have removed it yet again, as it is a potential BLP violation, sourced only to a blog. Favonian (talk) 21:05, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Dead picture file

There is a picture missing, though the info is still there. I don't know how to fix this--can someone who knows how please do it? Thanks.--TEHodson 22:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the image wiki-code, there doesn't seem to be a corresponding picture. Maybe it was deleted as a copyvio or something. Thanks. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 23:23, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Groovy.--TEHodson 06:36, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

National Archives -- original research

Saying that such-and-such data is available in the National Archives implies that the editor looked at the material itself. WP:NOR says don't do that. Such material is not published -- it is simply "stuff" in boxes, on microfilm, scanned, etc. --S. Rich (talk) 16:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Information taken from an official military service record is not orginial research. This has been discussed at length on several noticeboards. The SS service records, along with summaries of SS careers, are on file at the SS Records and Captured Nazi documents section of the National Archives at College Park. We even have two independent articles on these records, mainly Service record of Reinhard Heydrich and Service record of Heinrich Himmler. -OberRanks (talk) 18:53, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
It's true that we have articles about the service records. And with the Heydrich service record article we see the 4 or 5 authors that have looked at the records and published accessible WP:RS. (The Heydrich article itself is well referenced.)
But where in the actual National Archives can we find the specific supporting records on the individuals? With such "National Archives" citations, as we see now, we can't. That is, such citations really say "there are documents in boxes, etc. in the National Archives which support our contentions about such-and-such facts, but we won't or can't tell you where or how to find them." In other words, the "citations" are not published.
Now they might be accessible. I suggest looking at this: [5] resource as a starting point.
Also, please give me links to the noticeboards. I am certainly interested in resolving this. Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 19:44, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
To the best of my memory, it was discussed on the German History Noticeboard and the Military History Noticeboard between 2005 and now at least three or four times. I think also on the "Reference Help Desk" or something like that around 2007 and 2008. I can appreciate your position, I've just been involved in this discussion several times over the past five years and it seems to always come up again. The way it has been explained to me is that a military service record is a primary source and material taken directly out of such a record, without interpretation, is reliable referenced data. I'm not on wikipedia every day now, so I dont have time to find the diffs and start up the conversation on a noticeboard again. I will say that these service histories and service summaries on the SS articles have stood unchallenged for years and there always is a big storm when someone tries to remove them. But, like I also said, I understand where you're coming from. -OberRanks (talk) 19:55, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
If we have actual access to those service records, then we can use them as WP:PRIMARY, "but only with care." When we look at those bare service records and then say "The Sports Badge was an award of particular importance in Nazi Germany", we are committing WP:OR/WP:SYN.--S. Rich (talk) 20:11, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I thought we were discussing listing Josef Mengele's service information in this article. The German Sports Badge article is being discussed on a totally separate talk page and has already been sourced with academic texts. I agree we cant draw personal conclusions about the importance of information in the records, that is clearly OR. -OberRanks (talk) 20:34, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. My starting contention is about footnotes 38 & 39 in this article. I'm striking my comment about the importance of the Sports Badge, but the basic issue remains. That is, using "National Archives" without further citation is poor editing. In this article the German Sports Badge is listed without reference/citation.--S. Rich (talk) 21:43, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

This is part of a much larger question as to whether service summaries and list of awards should require individual citations for every date of rank and every decoration, or if simply the official service record of the individual may be cited as a source for everything. This has been discussed before, and as far as know a service record entry is a good broad source. Otherwise, articles would be cluttered with citations for listed information. Take Service summary of Douglas MacArthur for instance (which actually could be better sourced). In any event, such a question isn't going to be solved here. -OberRanks (talk) 01:10, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Why do survivor accounts of "a gentle, affable man" keep getting deleted?

Why do accounts of surviving twins who describe Mengele as being a "father figure" to them and remembering him as "a gentle, affable man", keep getting removed. Does inclusion of positive memories of Mengele by these eye witness accounts taken from a reputable secondary source, infringe wiki policy in some way? [6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystichumwipe (talkcontribs)

You have been making a series of edits to this article which convey the impression that Mengele was, in reality, a misunderstood, genial father figure, an innocent man who doted on children and merely did his medical duty at the camps, who got a bad reputation because of "postwar notoriety" and unreliable eye-witnesses. This is, of course, quite the opposite of the view reliable historians have of the man. Moreover, it's not even in accord with the view the source you have used, which portrays him as a mass-murdering monster who managed to fool some of the younger children upon whom he experimented into seeing him as a kind of father figure, "a gentle affable man" (the small number, that is, who survived his "experiments"). It's only through a highly selective use of the source, essentially combing it for any scrap of information that might portray Mengele in a positive light, that one might mislead the reader into imagining this about Mengele. This, combined with your recent edits to Buchenwald concentration camp (discussion here ) and Belzec extermination camp (discussion here), shows a disturbing pattern. Jayjg (talk) 23:57, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
On the contrary. I am merely pointing out that the "disturbing pattern" is that you and others are deleting material on the basis of some other criteria than wiki policy. Twins memories DID describe Mengele as a "gentle and affable man". The source IS a reputable secondary source that is already being cited. You ARE deleting material based on some other criteria than wiki policy. Our personal opinion should not enter into this discussion.
The wiki policy that justifies removing your edits is WP:NOR. Introducing cherry-picked quotes, and insistence on referring to old sources which have not withstood the test of time, such as the 'Promise Hitler Kept', is textbook original research. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 08:20, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
We are discussing why the complete inclusion of a quote from a reliable secondary source is being censored to include only certain parts of survivor testimony. So WP:NOR therefore is not applicable. And ironically "Cherry-picked quotes" is precisely what I am attempting to correct and is the exact infringement of policy that I am drawing attention to and is being allowed in this instance. The book you mention has no relevance to this talk page. Lets keep this concise and clear: 'is it OK for editors to delete parts of a quote from a reliable secondary source because they personally don't like the content of those parts of the quote'? That is the issue I have initiated a discussion about here.--Mystichumwipe (talk) 13:30, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
It wasn't a quote, because you didn't enclose it in quotation marks. In fact, much of the material you added was directly copied from the source without enclosing it in quotation marks. We are editors here - we make editorial decisions about how to paraphrase sources. Please review Wikipedia:Plagiarism. Jayjg (talk) 16:53, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
If this discussion is just about about "how to paraphrase sources" why haven't you deleted other parts of the quote that DO still appear in the article? If its only a case of when and how to use quotation marks or incitations, why haven't you proposed a solution along these lines instead of repeated undos/editwarring?
My question here has been about repeatedly deleting a selective part of the original quote and the reasons for that. You gave your reason above by misrepresenting me and my intention. I have not been trying to "mislead the reader into imagining this about Mengele" as you impugned. That was an ad hominem attack. Our own personal opinions should not be relevant. A positive assessment of him by surviving twins from a reputable secondary source is relevant to the article. I even attempted a rewording to avoid it being plagiarism after your first deletion which you recently undid. AND you have allowed some wording from the quote to remain. What is that if not censorship to delete survivors description of him as a "gentle and affable man"? I do now wonder if you are able to apply wiki policy unbiasedly on this subject as you do appear to me to be pushing a non-neutral POV. As I do not want to get into an edit war nor take up further time/space on this talkpage, and as you have made this an ad hominem attack here and elsewhere, I ask you as an administrator of many years to tell me, what is 1.) the most appropriate channel for dealing with this observation and impression? and 2.) what channel to deal with this particular policy infringement regarding this Mengele article. --Mystichumwipe (talk) 18:16, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
I have merely described the actual effect of your edits, and the way in which this was achieved. You can look for some other venue in which to deal with this, such as mediation, but given your edits here, and at Buchenwald concentration camp, Belzec extermination camp, and earlier at Criticism of Holocaust denial, I would be wary of WP:BOOMERANG. In the meanwhile, I'll look for some third-party assessments. Jayjg (talk) 21:27, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and for any others reading, these are the edits made here by Mystichumwipe. Jayjg (talk) 22:46, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I was asked by Jayjg to review this article and the discussion here. I share his concerns that sentences are being cherry-picked to portray Mengele as a kind-hearted father figure. The web page you cite includes important qualifiers you omitted ("Strangely enough, many of them recall Mengele as a gentle, affable man.... Since many had immediately been separated from their families upon entering the camp, Mengele became a sort of father figure." [my emphasis]), and whose absence significantly changes the meaning of the sentences. By selectively quoting phrases out of context, you may be engaging in original research—worse yet, you may be misrepresenting what the source says. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 23:05, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Mystichumwipe, to present a source objectively, it isn't enough to use the words of the source but also the overall impression given by the source has to be maintained. The overall impression I get from that source is a lot more horrendous than the words you chose would convey if I read only them. I think Jayjg's latest version does a better job. Zerotalk 12:30, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

1. Ironically, it was exactly my desire that the "overall impression given by the source has to be maintained" that has led to this talkpage topic. My enquiry is precisely why that is NOT being done in this case.
2. The fact remains - which no-one has disputed - that survivor-twins did describe Mengele as a "gentle and affable man". If we put that back in with whatever else you want from the source then there is no problem. But still neither Jayjg, nor anyone else involved has suggested that. On the contrary. So in the absence of any explanation based upon valid wiki policy for why that solution has still not been suggested, please explain how that is not censorship and pushing a point of view?
Here is my suggestion: someone else fix the wording as you would like BUT INCLUDING the description of Mengele as "a gentle and affable man" by these survivors.
3. Jayjg has defended what I see as his censorship with: "We are editors here - we make editorial decisions about how to paraphrase sources" How can I now be accused of cherry picking for just such paraphrasing? :-o The whole thrust of the article is focused on the negative appraisals of the man. How can including accurately the few positive testimonies be 'cherry picking' and yet repeatedly deleting them is not that?
4. As for a boomerang effect, I have only ever tried to contribute to the accuracy and neutrality of articles on wikipedia and I have AT ALL TIMES tried to do so by scrupulously following wiki policy. If I have done anything against the spirit of wiki policy I welcome that being shown to me. Regarding 'shooting ourselves in the foot', this article uses some questionable sources. E.g. Does a respectable encyclopedia really need to rely on statements taken from TruTV crime library? (ref.23). [7] In the interests of the bigger picture, I suggest that this does not reflect well on the credibility of Wikipedia as a serious reference source. --Mystichumwipe (talk) 14:09, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Squiddy, Malik Shabazz, Zero0000 and I have all explained why we think the current presentation of the material is more true to the source, and more appropriate for the article. You need not accept those explanations, but we're also not obligated to continue repeating them. Jayjg (talk) 16:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
But you have not addressed my argument. You have just ignored it. My four-point clarifying reply has subsequently been ignored also. I gave above a suggestion for how compromise can easily be reached here. That has been ignored too. :-o
MANY twins DID give interviews in which they described Mengele only as "a gentle and affable man" who befriended them, etc. This is a statement of fact, do people agree so far? To include a sentence that then goes on to explain that positive assessment but then to delete the positive opinion itself, how is that NOT censorship? How is the reader allowed to be informed and decide for themself with this deletion? Mengele himself did claim "I personally have not killed, injured or caused bodily harm to anyone." And here are eye witness accounts (plural) that on the face of it appear to support that, which are being deleted. By all means include the 2ndary sources explanation for that anomaly. But surely we have to also include that anomaly itself!? As I see it, to not do so goes against Wiki presenting information neutrally and without bias.
Please address these points. And if you believe they already have been, please can show me to the exact sentences. I'm a reasonable person.Just talk to my specific points. Thanks in advance.-Mystichumwipe (talk) 10:47, 17 May 2012 (UTC)--Mystichumwipe (talk) 10:47, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Why does Wikipedia pass on fairytales? The horror stories have no basis in facts and are fake, just like the soap and lampshade stories. (unsigned ip account - see [8])

^ How did you determine that the stories are fake? What point are you trying to make, that none of this happened and should be ignored? Seems like a pretty far-fetched consipracy that all of the survivor accounts were untrue. Information on Mengele's actions come from victims, other SS personell, and even his own diary. Seems like the reality would be that there are even worse facts considering how Verschuer destroyed Mengele's documentation/evidence. UselessToRemain (talk) 19:13, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll add my .02. I don't want to go into every point made above because it would take all day to process mentally. However there are a couple thoughts that come to mind.

I don't understand why Mengele's quote about never having killed/hurt anyone would be relevant to the argument about why the quote should stay. Kanye West claims to be a genius, David Allan Coe claims he is not a racist. Doesn't make it true and it should only be included as a quote, not as a fact. My POV is that it seems like he may have been in denial if he really thought that as it is contrary to much testimony. Furthermore, there are 2 instances of his claim to have never harmed anyone - one to his child Rolf and another relayed by Hans Sedlmeier. IMO that quote is given its due here but is a quote from the man rather than a fact about him and therefore is somewhat trivial. I might have missed your point with that though so do elaborate if I'm missing something.

As far as the topic of concern here(the "gentle/affable man" quote), I think there is sufficient similar sentiment throughout the article and I think adding any more would be giving undue weight that he was such a "kind" man. A quick glance at the article unveils the following: "subjects of Mengele's research were better fed and housed," "Mengele the Protector," "capable of being so kind to the children," "Many recalled his friendly manner towards them, and his gifts of chocolate." Seems like these quotes are intercepted with negatives as well in an appropriate manner. My opinion is that this should suffice in terms of the positive aspects of the man. This is just my opinion, fortunately I was not involved personally so I'm not the guru. UselessToRemain (talk) 20:25, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

A 1978 World in Action edition about Josef Mengele, narrated by Chris Kelly, here: [9]
To all, the anon ip comment above was a sole purpose account to add Holocaust denial statements to certain SS articles. I would say WP:DFTT applies and also might want to just block the account. -OberRanks (talk) 19:39, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Copyright Issues

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. — Bility (talk) 23:57, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Impossible Dates.

"In 1950, he was placed in the reserve medical corps, after which he served with the 5th SS Panzergrenadier Division Wiking in the Eastern Front. In 1952" Im guessing its vandalism. will switch it back. (talk) 13:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

nevermind, someone beat me to it! That was fast. (talk) 13:41, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Was he an atheist?

If he was an atheist that should be written at the sidebar (religion/worldview: atheist) This because of two reasons 1) if its true its true, 2) when people debate religion it needs to be stated who was evil and cruel as theist and who was evil and cruel as atheist. It´s very relevant in the "culture wars".

So was he an athiest or not? The title here states he was, but the sentence says "if he was." It's important but I don't think I've ever read anything that specified if he was or not. I agree with you but the below comment is correct that the culture wars is not the correct reason to add this. It should be added if it is correct and possible to verify so people have factual information on the topic. UselessToRemain (talk) 20:00, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Well? UselessToRemain (talk) 23:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
If it's true put it in the article because it's valid and has sources. Not because you want to fight "culture wars". (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:04, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
According to, he was Roman Catholic, and The Biography Channel [[10]] has it that he had a strict Catholic upbringing. Are either of these sources reliable? The wiki article for David Hilbert claims he was agnostic based on his NNDB profile.

Why Ask for Editing, if Editing is Not Allowed?

A Wiki notice at the head of the article states, "This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations."

However, the article appears to be locked, so no "improvement", "verification", or "addition of citations" is possible.

Who is the final arbiter of such things? Is there one "senior editor" running Wikipedia, whose opinion trumps all others? And isn't that contrary to the stated philosophy of Wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:40, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Please sign your comments using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you want to edit the article while it is protected beyond your editing authority, the correct procedure is to write here what edit you want to make and why you want to make it. Someone with more authority will make the edit for you if they consider it will improve the article. There is a formal method, see Wikipedia:Edit requests. Zerotalk 03:14, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Names and dates wrong

His second name wasn' t Rudolf, that was a myth created by the internet. The is no serious source that contains that information, in the Posner book is not mentioned that his second name was Rudolf or that he had any second name at all. In his SS record it' s not mentioned or listed, he never signed as Rudolf either so it' s just a myth. Some people will also say that his second name was Wilhelm because his grandfather was called like that, that' s another myth, actually, none of his close ascendants were called Wilhelm, nor Rudolf. Here is his family tree if anyone is interested:

Josephus Xavierus Mengele (1788-???) married ????? son: Alois Mengele (1843-1917) married Theresia Maier (or Mayr) (1846-1918) Son: Karl Mengele

Joseph Hupfauer (????- 1914) married Theresia Bux (1850-1897) Daughter: Walburga Theresia Hupfauer

Karl Mengele (1884-1959) (some say 1881) married Walburga Hupfauer (1880-1946) (some say 1890) Sons: Josef Mengele (1911-1979) - Karl Thaddeus Mengele (1912-1949) - Alois Mengele (1914-1974)

Also, his son Rolf wasn' t born in 1941, he was born in 1944, I fixed that.

Add the Angle of Death to the aushwitz section.

--Beppo911 (talk) 13:24, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

My contribution was reverted due to "Odd date changes"??? PLEASE, it' s common knowledge that Rolf Mengele was born in 1944, it' s in every book imaginable and he even mentions it himself! --Beppo911 (talk) 01:22, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Your edits are unsourced, and keep breaking links to (for example) audio files. Please review WP:V and WP:RS, and bring reliable sources for your claims. Jayjg (talk) 01:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

A source would be much more appropriate to prove the existence of that middle name. I have never seen any evidence for that; even in official documents, nothing like that can be found. Therefore, this piece of information is most probably wrong and should be put out of the article —- at least until a suitable source is given.
Tubifex (talk) 11:43, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Tubifex is correct. Sources are needed for inclusion, not for exclusion. I looked at three biographies of Mengele without finding "Rudolf". I could only find it in a few recent tertiary sources that were probably influenced by Wikipedia. It is not mentioned in his 200 page OSI file. Until a solid source for this information is produced, "Rudolf" is gone. Zerotalk 03:31, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
This Justice Department file on Mengele reproduces a large number of documents, none of which show a middle name. Zerotalk 04:12, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

In culture section

I believe Josef Mengele had enough influence on popular culture to merit a section dedicated to it, there are more than enough books and movies about him.

So I think we should re-add the section.Farzam1370 (talk) 06:36, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Problem with 'In Popular Culture' sections is that they turn into slews of random sci-fi novels, films, rock songs, etc., which happen to mention the subject of the article. Where someone/something has become an icon or by-word then an 'In Culture' section is appropriate, but they always have to be watched and pruned vigorously.
In short, I think they do more harm than good, and I wouldn't like to see one added to this article. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 09:26, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Sudtirol versus Genoa

The english page about Josef Mengele states that Mengele fled to Genoa in 1949 where he obtained a passport from the Red Cross International Organization, but this is not true: Mengele fled to the little village of Termeno, in Sudtirol, where the local authorities issued a false passport (they did the same for Adolf Eichmann and other Nazi criminals) with which he went to Genoa to board the ship to South America. It was not Italy that helped him, but some people from Sudtirol, who felt very close to the German culture and the Nazi movement79.18.245.190 (talk) 21:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Levy page 263 says he got his Red Cross passport at the Swiss consulate in Genoa. Posner and Ware says the same thing on page 90. Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
According to Steinacher "Nazis on the Run" Oxford 2011, Mengele was issued a passport in the name of Helmut Gregor on the basis of an ID card from Tramin (Tremino) by the ICRC in Genoa. Might be worth mentioning in more detail though. ÄDA - DÄP VA (talk) 07:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
It's too much detail, in my opinion. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Josef Mengele/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Secret (talk · contribs) 00:28, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this within the next few days. Thanks Secret account 00:28, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Secret! Thank you very much for taking this on. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:49, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

There is an organization(club) of surviving twins from the Mengle studies. I beleive about 400 members, at least until recently. The inclusion of their group and maybe input in the article would be interesting. (talk) 15:56, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I heard of this too, but I can't seem to find a source. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I thought this review would be heavily time consuming when I took it, but personal life got in the way and sorry it took three weeks to finally reviewing it. Once I read through the article, I was surprised. The article is in pretty good shape overall with no major flaws preventing it from GA status. The citations is reliable, I had a copy of Gerald Posner's Mengele book and he is reliable as a historian, but it seems to be in my old home so I no longer have a copy. No close paraphrasing concerns with the online sourcing. I'll be quick passing this article for GA as I don't have much concerns with the prose. What I thought it would be a long and difficult process ended up as a quick pass. I apologize for the wait. If you decide to do a peer review, I could probably review the content further as I will have access to some of the books. Thanks Secret account 18:19, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much Secret for reviewing the article. Best, -- Diannaa (talk) 18:33, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

"After Auschwitz" section incorrect, lacks basic information, & badly written

It is claimed here that Mengele was assisted in 1949 by Hans-Ulrich Rudel; according to the wp article, Rudel had left Europe in 1948. One of these articles is therefore wrong and should be corrected ASAP. Also, "Worried that his capture would mean a trial and death sentence" is a strangely (humorously?) worded (and entirely unnecessary) phrase. And, in Genoa, "he obtained a passport... from the... Red Cross" - this statement conveys no information, since it applies to all escaping Nazis (more or less, I believe). The question of who actually assisted him is, strangely, not addressed here. Generally the most notorious Nazis (eg. Eichmann) were protected by the Catholic Church; can anyone confirm if this was the case for Mengele, or is it, perhaps, unknown how he escaped? Surely, a "Good Article" should contain such basic information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Signedzzz (talkcontribs) 05:59, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. The information in Hans-Ulrich Rudel about Rudel leaving Europe in 1948 is unsourced and besides, Rudel would not have to be present in Europe to offer assistance. Since the names of additional individuals who assisted Menegele are not mentioned in the sources, it's not possible to add them here. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:01, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. Was Rudel actually a member of the SS? How did he "assist", who were the others, and what role did they supposedly play? The article seems to be completely vague on the subject.Signedzzz (talk) 16:53, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
The Rudel article states that he met Mengele in South America, ie after Mengele had already escaped - and it is sourced.Signedzzz (talk) 17:17, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
I have checked Levy page 265-266, the source for this bit, and it says that Rudel moved to South America after the war. His status as a top fighter pilot led to a position in the National Institute of Aeronautics in Argentina. He earned the trust and friendship of dictator Juan Perón. He met Mengele in Venezuela. (Levy, page 265) Rudel served as manufacturers' representative for Karl Mengele & Sons and other German manufacturing firms. He made frequent trips back to Germany in this capacity (page 266). There is nothing on these two pages that says Rudel helped Mengele get out of Europe. So I have taken that out. Rudel did help Mengele relocate into Brazil in 1960 (page 273). Thank you for spotting this mistake. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:48, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I am concerned that you say that this section is based entirely on one book, written by a general author as opposed to a historian (see Alan Levy); and the book in question isn't even about the subject of this article. It would be preferable to state in the article that nothing at all is known about Mengele's escape; if any info from this particular book is used, it should be clearly explained what the author claims to base his opinion on. Any reader of this article might expect that the information is factual and verifiable - bearing in mind that it claims to be a Good Article - which is hardly the case when it is based on only one book, written by a non-expert, about a different subject. Signedzzz (talk) 08:43, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

The section "After Auschwitz" is based on multiple books, not just one book. See footnotes 57 to 66. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:43, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes. But some statements in the section only cite this one book by Levy, who is, as I mention above, not a historian, and therefore not particularly reliable - or, at least, not appropriate for wp.Signedzzz (talk) 16:51, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
However, I may be just splitting hairs at this point. Signedzzz (talk) 17:26, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
It seems, though, that the second half of the article, from "After Auschwitz" onwards, relies almost entirely on this particular book, written by a non-historian, and one other - about half each. These sections of the article have little credibility as a result. Signedzzz (talk) 18:32, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
And as I mentioned, I do not see why the 4 years between the end of the war and his eventual escape from Europe merits only one short paragraph, while his time in S. America, where he did nothing of any significance, is described at such great length. Signedzzz (talk) 19:46, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Same story two versions

This article states "The children died of gangrene after several days of suffering", the article The Holocaust has under the section a different version, another experiment or one version is wrong? prokaryotes (talk) 03:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Eugen Fischer and Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer

This might be added, quote: " Fischer's protégé Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer, and von Verschuer's master pupil Josef Mengele, who eventually continued his teacher's twin studies at the Auschwitz concentration camp", thus Mengele had a close connection. Link prokaryotes (talk) 03:33, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

The internet has many sources claiming Mengele studied under Fischer, this page section, claims it too (based on a weak source) prokaryotes (talk) 10:45, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
The source here says that Mengele was a student of von Verschuer, not of Fischer. I am unable to find any reliable sources, online or in books, that say Menegele was a student of Fischer. Wikipedia is not a reliable source. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:58, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
I've updated the wrong info with Mengele at prokaryotes (talk) 20:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


I am not referring to the once given to him after the war. I think it was Beppo or Pepi. He was also known as The Dr. of Death/ The Angel of Death — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:37, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Background information

Many of our readers on WWII topics are high school students encountering the subject for the first time. This paragraph gives a little background as to the Nazi ideology, so that readers will understand better what was going on at Auschwitz and why Menegele was able to get away with doing what he did.-- Diannaa (talk) 14:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

The intent of an "introductory history statement" within an article is understandable, and that provided for Nazism is a wonderful summary of that ideology but concerning WWII, those Nazi's were one extensive group of people! If we apply the logic that a summery should be included in an article because of a particular audience segment that most likely will have little if any knowledge of a subject or incident then we have instead of the use of a link to a main article or a segment of a main article we have the potential for countless historical background summaries of the same topic throughout WP. The non-use of links to main topic articles may be an indication that the main article lacks a good summary. In the increasingly me me me know know know generation(s) people have to become aware that everything is not always in the same place. At least now it can be at your secondary body's finger type 24/7/365 (as long as the electricity is good) rather than hunting something down in the stacks. But just like any creative endeavor, the excellence is in the art of the expression. Go for it and see if it works. (talk) 19:39, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


"Had he continued this academic focus, Mengele would likely have become a professor." is this more pov regardless as to Mengele saying it, or his biographer or the statement contributor and could better be represented as, "so-and-so said that his academic and research focus could very well have led to a professorship". The use of the camp detainees would not naturally excluded from his work in a Fascist state as the work and actions of individuals was part of the greater development of the country/people? (talk) 19:53, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I have removed the sentence about his possible professorship. I don't understand your second question; perhaps you could re-word it. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:33, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
"Possible professorship" I'd rather view it as the speculation of the author as to someone's potential career path; even if it was the author's pov. But then if that author is an authority then the statement might have the weight to stand, or at least be the more possible than impossible for someone to consider. (talk) 23:08, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
As far as I can recall it was the opinion of the author (Kirk Allison of the University of Minnesota). I would have to get the book in on inter-library loan to be sure, so it's simpler to take it out. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:57, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

No need on my account to go through all the effort to review something that has unilaterally been eliminated. WP does not use original research but we do rely on authorities that do. If a state university professor has come to that "career tract" conclusion then that professor may very well be so proficient in the subject of the book or the subject of pre-1945 German doctorates to see a pattern that at least he is willing to put forth. That is a subject all to itself and I seriously doubt it is explored or to be found in that book. But if it is then the WP contributor should have qualified their inclusion of the statement in the WP article rather than just leave it to a citation of the immediate source to act as a means of validity. Maybe it is to be found in the German language academic literature. (talk) 01:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


Why is there little to nothing about his career as an abortionist? -- (talk) 18:03, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Please provide some sources. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:14, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Here's one. -- (talk) 22:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I have added some content. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:30, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Minor correction in: Military service

There stands: "Mengele joined the Nazi Party in 1937 and the Schutzstaffel (SS protection squadron) in 1938."

I think in parenthesis should be 'NP protection squadron', or, rather, 'NSDAP protection squadron', as SS = Schutz-staffel = protection squadron. Or 'Nazi Party's protection squadron'? Or even 'SS, NSDAP protection squadron'? That SS is an abreviation what stands for 'Schutzstaffel' is not obvious for everybody and most people keep forgetting that. Well, not here, definitely, and in this article it's clear.

Sorry to disturb if that's so minor correction that no need to talk about, but thought this article might be protected or smth, so's not all and any can correct/mess up. :) BirgittaMTh (talk) 15:45, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I just removed confusing SS from before 'protection squadron', seems ok to me this way. (Thought about changing not-official-sounding Nazi Party (after all, we do have article 'Communist Party of the Soviet Union' not 'Commie Party'; parallel is obvious) to NSDAP but then found that there's been an almighty discussion about article's name and didn't dare to revive it. Maybe I should?) Oh, and if this change (confusing abbreviation deleted) is accepted by those article-protecting entities, may I remove all this topic, section, from here? Or will you? BirgittaMTh (talk) 16:22, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Normally we leave talk page posts in place, as a record of discussions. I changed it to read Schutzstaffel (SS; protection squadron), as the SS is well known by the abbreviation, so we need to include it. Also, the abbreviation is used further down in the article, so we need to define it.-- Diannaa (talk) 18:43, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
The current change reads better; further, the abbreviation SS should be kept as the organisation is very well known by it and the current format of presentation is in line with other examples in the article, such as: Nazi Sturmabteilung (Storm Detachment; SA). Kierzek (talk) 03:08, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


While reading the article I was confused that he had no "MD" after his name and is not referred to as "doctor" in the text. I came here to ask about this. The archive has a comment stating that both of his doctorates were rescinded due to his actions(no citations). Yet there is nothing about this in the article. I think that is something that should be mentioned, probably in the legacy section. Ayzmo (talk) 22:50, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

We don't include honorifics, academic titles, or degrees in the prose, per the Manual of style. You can see the guideline at the bottom of this section. None of the sources I used to prepare the article for its Good Article nomination said that his degrees were rescinded. We would need a source to add it. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:08, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Have a look at --> and --> ALSO --> and Finally -->
I have the Levy book here; the footnote is at the bottom of page 234 of my edition. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

His degrees: I understood he had a doctorate in philosophy from U. of Munich, and in medicine from U. of Frankfurt. The article says otherwise, more research needed. (Both of these degrees were revoked by the issuers after the war). (talk) 09:31, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Kubica agrees with you so I have gone ahead and corrected it. Thanks for the catch, -- Diannaa (talk) 14:34, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Josef Mengele/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Lead needs expansion, needs inline citations, and refs that are there need formatting. Quadzilla99 19:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 19:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC).

Substituted at 15:09, 1 May 2016 (UTC)