Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
ProjectDiscussionOpen tasksAssessmentFeatured ContentMembersPortal

Proposed deletion of Annett Renneberg[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Annett Renneberg has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

Unreferenced article about German actress

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one.

Confusion between Germany and the Holy Roman Empire[edit]

I've just been looking at the categories covering the history of Germany and those covering the history of the Holy Roman Empire and there appears to be a degree of duplication and also confusion about which to use when.

For example, we have:

...however, Category:Military history of the Holy Roman Empire is a sub-category of Category:Military history of Germany, the latter otherwise generally confining itself to the period from the First World War onwards.

This results in inconsistency, e.g. the Battle of Andernach is in Category:10th century in Germany, Category:10th century in East Francia and Category:Battles involving the Holy Roman Empire, but not in Category:10th century in the Holy Roman Empire.

German Wikipedia largely avoids this duplication. For example, we have Kategorie:Deutsche Geschichte (10. Jahrhundert) (Category:German history (10th century)), which is subordinated to both Kategorie:Deutsche Geschichte (Heilige Römisches Reich) (Category:German history (Holy Roman Empire)) and Kategorie:Deutsche Geschichte nach Jahrhundert (Category:German history by century).

We could do something very similar; the main difficulty being to find a category titles that aren't too unwieldy. "Category:German history (Holy Roman Empire)" seems to combine the two quite neatly. Below that we could have "Category:10th-century German history" etc. Any thoughts? --Bermicourt (talk) 18:51, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I support this idea. Wikipedia Categories are knotted mass of wires on a titanic scale. Then comes the problem with renaming and/or deleting and creating new categories and tagging hundreds of articles hundreds of times. Back to topic, I like your idea but simplified to just "10th century German history" with subcats as necessary. –Vami_IV✠ 04:56, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
We need to be prepared to convince the history project and category buffs that using "10th-century German history" makes more sense than "10th century in Germany" because we're really talking about the history of the German peoples during the period of the HRE and not about the history of Germany, which did not exist as a country and does not cover the geographical spread of the Germans in the period in question. So although you and I can see this makes sense, we may face opposition from those who don't understand the background. Bermicourt (talk) 18:42, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
What a hill to die on. I'm ready when you are. –Vami_IV✠ 01:26, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Maybe ask the colleagues at WP:POLAND. They should face a similar problem. Agathoclea (talk) 11:04, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
That is a very good idea, actually. –Vami_IV✠ 14:00, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Modelling on Poland[edit]

Alirghty, I posted an invite on WP:Poland's talk page. While we wait for a response, I decided it would be good to look at Category:History of Poland and compare it to Category:History of Germany, and I noticed that is a bit more extensive than our own. For starters, it is generally larger than our own - it has a filled out History by Region section, for example. It even has a Treasure section. –Vami_IV✠ 14:22, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

One of the issues we need to be aware of is that the geographical boundaries "Poland" vary hugely over time. Large swathes of what is now Poland used to be Germany and, before that, various states (e.g. Brandenburg, Lusatia) of the Holy Roman Empire. Equally a large chunk of what was Poland went to the Soviet Union and is now, I believe, White Russian or Ukrainian. My sense is that there may need to be greater clarity about the history of e.g. a place in present-day Poland that once belonged elsewhere. The simple solution would seem to be to include all the relevant historical categories. For example, Wrocław (Breslau for much of its history it seems), was historically in Bohemia, Poland, Silesia, Hungary, the HRE, Prussia, the German Empire and Germany. It would seem to make sense for it to be in the history categories of all those states, but currently it's only in Category:History of Silesia, and thus the Category:History of the Holy Roman Empire, and Category:History of Poland. No mention of its time as part of Bohemia, Prussia or Germany... But that is easy to resolve. I think the confusion over Germany/HRE above is more tricky. Bermicourt (talk) 21:18, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
History of Poland periodization and categories went through several wiki evolutions as well. IIRC it used to be organized by state first (History of Kingdom of Poland, history of PLC, history of partioned Poland states, etc.). Then we switched to years with the 'history of Poland (1xxx-1xxx) variant. Perhaps most easy way to observe the changes would be to look at the changes in the history of Template:History of Poland navbox. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Pinging German speakers and readers[edit]

We have a need on the ANI board for German readers specifically, since an issue with the German magazine "Spex" has come up, and since neither side can read German, neither side can properly evaluate whether or not it can be used as a reference for certain musical generes. You participation is greatly appreciated! ►К Ф Ƽ Ħ◄ 14:16, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Pinging @Wikirictor: and @Gerda Arendt: for their fluency in German. Godspeed. –Vami_IV✠ 14:50, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

A-Class review for L 20e α-class battleship needs attention[edit]

A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for L 20e a-class battleship; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 02:50, 21 April 2018 (UTC)


There is a discussion here which may be of interest to members of this project. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:36, 23 April 2018 (UTC)


I'm not clear how to translate "Naturalgefälle" in this sentence from de:Beatrix von Berg (Beatrix of Berg).

Ihr Mann hinterließ Beatrix als Witwengut Burg und Stadt Neuburg am Rhein, sowie das Dorf Hagenbach und Naturalgefälle in Bergzabern.

I can't find it in a dictionary, and it seems from Google to have a legal meaning which isn't clear to me. Peter Flass (talk) 02:44, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

i found this. It seems to have a meaning in a feudal context, something like the Landed property that a person had the right to receive rent from - not in the form of money but in-kind, like lumber or wheat or meat or whatever. See also de:Gefälle (Recht) for the base term -- Jytdog (talk) 04:33, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, that's sort of what I got out of it. There's probably an equivalent in english feudalism, but in both cases the term has dropped out of current usage. Peter Flass (talk) 13:34, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Lots of the old sources make a distinction between this and getting money; i think the "in kind" thing is important. Oh! I just found Tax in kind. and also put de:Naturalien (!) together with de:Gefälle (Recht) and i think we are home. Jytdog (talk) 20:06, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
"Natural" = non-cash (a field, a cow, a bag of grain), "gefälle" (fällig) = due (amount due). "Naturalgefälle" = rent in kind (hist.) . "Naturalgefälle" is not used in modern German, today it means "fällige Sachleistungen" ("non-cash benefits due").Qualitätssteigerung (talk) 21:51, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

All articles assessed[edit]

Project Coordinator Vami_IV, myself, has the pleasure of announcing to the WikiProject that, for the moment, every single article under our [wiki] banner has been assessed by quality from Stub-class to Featured. Category:Unassessed Germany articles used to be something like 4000~ articles long, if I recall correctly. With this milestone, the first of my personal objectives for the project has been accomplished. Special thanks to those editors who were tagging articles with the banner while I was assessing - we've moved a little bit of a mountain with these last few months of work! –Vami_IV✠ 10:55, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Update: I may have confused our backlog with another nation's, like Spain or France; it's probably more likely that the original number was around 2000 thereabouts. –Vami_IV✠ 13:50, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
A year ago it was more than 4000. Other historical data is also available. Good job in any case! Next step: do something useful with the assessment data :) —Kusma (t·c) 14:53, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Well done. I always try to assess articles as I create them to avoid a backlog. Bermicourt (talk) 15:23, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

summer time in Germany, 1939[edit]

Time in Germany states, without ref, more or less that 'summer time was used in Germany at some point, and not at others'. Which is very vague and unhelpful. This is in ref to a discussion at Talk:World_War_II#The_exact_time_(hour,_minutes)_the_war_started_on_1st_September. It would be nice if we could clarify if there was a summer time difference between Germany and Poland on 1st Sept '39. PS. Also for the WWII discussion, any German sources on the time of the war start would be appreciated. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:52, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Red links to German villages and towns in Saar Offensive?[edit]

I find it strange that there may still be German villages (and towns) without Eng wiki stubs. Yet Saar Offensive is full of red links. Could they be mispellings? Can someone take a look? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:47, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

No, it's quite common to find that the smaller villages and hamlets don't have articles. My sense is that settlements at the level of a Gemeinde or Stadt (municipality or borough) are all covered; for all those below that level it's hit and miss. I checked most of those red links and they exist on but not here... yet. Plenty of work still to do! Bermicourt (talk) 15:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
If they exist in German do readers the favour to offer an interlanguage link, please, {{ill}}. Very generally so, not only for this article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:09, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
I did it for the first, Ihn (de). An alternative could be to pipe-link to the larger entity, another to create a redirect to that larger thing. - Another very general advice: no fixed image sizes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:15, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm on it. –Vami_IV✠ 19:31, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
IIRC Poland, for example, had a bot that added articles on nearly all populated places. I don't think it was the only country with that. I am surprised we haven't done it for other countries... Stubbing a populated place shouldn't be that difficult. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Night self-learning[edit]

My Korean students created the article on Night self-learning and they say that this is something also found in China and Germany. Could anyone verify this is indeed a phenomena related to Germany? I wonder if it is broader (international) or specifically Korean. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Weimar Republic is NOT a place[edit]

Hello everybody, for a while now I have noticed that people who were born between 1918 and 1933 in Germany have, as their place of birth, given Weimar Republic. I find that utterly confusing. Weimar Republic is the name of a period, not a place. It would be like claiming that someone born in New York in 1862 were born in "the Civil War", and not in the United States. The name of the state was still "Deutsches Reich" at that point. I would like to suggest to change this to "German Empire", while linking to Weimar Republic. Zwerg Nase (talk) 09:11, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Weimar Republic is still the nation's page. There is nothing here to be changed. Continue linking to Weimar Republic. –Vami_IV✠ 05:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
@Vami IV: I don't mind linking to Weimar Republic. I am saying though that by following WP:COMMONNAME and WP:OFFICIAL, we should probably use either "German Empire" or simply "Germany", because no-one - neither back then nor in literature today - describes the place (and this is what the parameter in the infobox is concerned with!) as Weimar Republic! Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, no. A place of birth is a place, and Weimar Republic (article even says "unofficial") there is as wrong as East Germany (nothing official ever, but I stopped arguing, see talk). Both (and West Germany, and others) can be linked to, but should not appear as place names. Agree with Zwerg Nase. - I normally write nothing, because a link to the town will tell the story. If more clarity is needed, I write "Germany", period. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:02, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: In the cases of West and East Germany, at least one can argue that these were actual Common Names used to describe the place. But that does not hold true for Weimar Republic. This really needs to change. Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
E and W were common names for states, not places, - when I wanted to use East Germany to specify the eastern part of Germany (a place), that was not ok, see Propsteikirche, Leipzig ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:01, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Well, Leipzig is in Mitteldeutschland ;) But we are getting off-topic. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:46, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Proposal for more Taskforces[edit]

Guten Abend, WikiProject Germany. I have noticed, in the course of assessing a couple thousand of our articles, that there exists taskforces for Frankfurt, Hamburg, and Munich, and WikiProjects for Bavaria and Lower Saxony. I would like to propose expanding the division of taskforces to include Berlin and Bremen, and bring WikiProjects Bavaria and Lower Saxony under our banner to join new taskforces for all the other Bundeslander (Baden-Württemberg, Hesse, North Rhine-Westphalia, Saxony, Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, the Saarland, Rhineland-Palatinate, Thuringia, Schleswig-Holstein, and Saxony-Anhalt). I really favor this arrangement for a few reasons, but let's do a cost-benefit analysis:


This would be lots of work to set up. An admin would have to set up all the code for the WikiProject Banner, new pages here at WPG would have to be set up for new/moved content, and articles would have to be tagged with the taskforce markers to justify the existence of said taskforces. In addition, the work to make the Pros pros could be long and tedious.


Greater decentralization of the WikiProject and better regional management and work. In addition, each of the taskforces could stockpile resources and source material for work in their Bundesland.

X –Vami_IV✠ 21:27, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Only worth the effort if there are enough people concentrating on the field in question. Take WP:Munich as an example: that was set up because someone thought it was really really important. Now I think I am the only one doing project work there. Article writers that cover Munich seem to have no connection to the project pages. Agathoclea (talk) 14:20, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject[edit]

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.


On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:39, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Claus Wisser[edit]

Claus Wisser, a multi-facetted personality. I'd like to see his company translated, but don't know some of the technical terms even in German: de:WISAG. He was member of the General Convention to elect the President, - does that put him in category politicians? - Any other help appreciated, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:03, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Seeking feedback[edit]

Salutations, my WikiProject. For several months now I have been working on Ludwigsburg Palace, and I think it is ready to begin a candidacy for Featured Article. This is an article of many firsts - it would be my first Featured Article, but more importantly it would be the first Featured Article for something directly related to Swabia, the first Featured Article for German Architecture, much less Baroque/Rococo/Neoclassical/Empire architecture in Germany. I would greatly appreciate comments and proofreading from members of this WikiProject, especially those of you partial to the 18th and early 19th centuries.

Signed, –Vami_IV✠ 01:15, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merger[edit]

I have proposed a merger of 2018 German government crisis into Fourth Merkel cabinet. Discussion is here. Deb (talk) 11:00, 4 July 2018 (UTC)