Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany/Archive 10

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

This project's subject has a page in the set of Lists of basic topics.

See the proposal at the Village pump to change the names of all those pages.

The Transhumanist 10:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

There's been a lot of acrimony for several years about the use of umlauted letters and ß in Wikipedia articles, particularly in article titles. Some editors have never seen an ß they didn't hate; others think that en.wikipedia should use German orthography regardless of whether there exists a standard and distinct way of writing a name in English (Rudolf Hess rather than Rudolf Heß, for example). Some WP projects have gotten around this problem by instituting their own project-specific conventions, such as Hawaii-related articles usually being titled without macrons and okinas, but then using these marks in the body of the article (thus the article titled Poipu uses Poʻipū in the text of the article). At the risk of stirring up the acrimony here, I'm wondering whether people involved in articles related Germany (and other Germanophone-related articles) want to set up a German-specific convention, so people don't waste their time with arguments like these, and instead get to work on improving articles or engaging in worthwhile real-world activities. --Atemperman (talk) 21:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

This is dealt with very briefly at WP:WikiProject Germany/Conventions#Alphabet but would probably need more clarification. I don't think many of those who object strongly to foreign Latin characters would necessarily be swayed by any project convention. --Boson (talk) 18:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:48, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

This new C Class sounds like a good idea to me. Should we go ahead and start using it? There are (in my opinion) quite a few articles that are too large and detailled to really be called Start class but do not meet our strict B-class criteria (referencing and citation; coverage and accuracy; structure; grammar; supporting materials). Should we discuss this here or start a discussion page at WT:WikiProject Germany/Assessment?--Boson (talk) 19:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Just discuss it here; not many people have other pages watchlisted. If we decide to adopt the new class, I can go and implement this in Template:WikiProject Germany, which is admin-only. Kusma (talk) 09:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

To make sure we don't lose "C-Class articles", they currently display Start-class. I can change that if people here feel we should implement "C". Kusma (talk) 17:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

As I said above, I think it would be a good idea. but it would be nice to hear other people's views. Should we also add the new criterion 6 for B-class to {{WikiProject Germany}}? --Boson (talk) 18:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The new criterion is "written in an accessible way" -- don't know if that is so important for us. Most of our articles are written with a general audience in mind anyway, not "Germany experts" (whatever that is). If no significant opposition develops here, I will add the C-Class to the template in a couple of days (probably on the weekend), but won't add B-6 as I think it doesn't really help us too much. Kusma (talk) 08:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I have added the C-class functionality to the template. Can somebody else take a look at the instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Assessment and update them accordingly? Thanks, Kusma (talk) 12:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello, need some Germany experts to answer the question of, what flag should be used for germany in 1934 (and all articles 12 March 1933 - 15 September 1935) (because there are some inconsistency with some articles using the tri-colour and some using the nazi flag), in places like 1934 FIFA World Cup, European LC Championships, Czechoslovakian Grand Prix, 1934 Grand Prix season. Which should be used, as they are described as "the two legal national flags of Germany" — chandler — 18:32, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

From 1933 to 1935 and were both official flags of Germany and obviously only used jointly. [1] --FordPrefect42 (talk) 19:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

So we should use for example in the World Cup article?  Germany — chandler — 22:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Seems like that would be the logical consequence. But admittedly, it would look strange ... --FordPrefect42 (talk) 23:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

As one can see in the respective article de:Flagge Deutschlands in the German Wikipedia, from 1933 on was the official German flag. was the flag of the German Merchant Navy until 1935, when it was replaced by . In addition, the German Imperial Navy flag (black Iron Cross on white, with in the upper left corner) was flown by naval vessels one day a year (I think, March 31). Greetings, Lost Boy (talk) 04:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

According to Hindenburg's decree (Reich Law Gazette, part I, 1933, p. 103), the Nazi flag had to be hoisted additionally to the black-white-red flag. That doesn't mean that the Nazi flag was the exclusive national flag of Germany. Greetings, -- kh80 (talk) 17:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd prefer using for practical reasons. As is a Nazi symbol, it's use is restricted in many countries. -- 3247 (talk) 19:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

An anonymous contributor using a succession of different e-addresses has worked through the post war chancellors entering 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc chancellor of Germany in the info box for each of the Federal Chancellors since Adenauer.

I have tried reversing this a couple of times in the case of Frau Merkel. For my money, the first chancellor of Germany was Otto von Bismarck. Angela Merkel is (I think) the eight Chancellor of the BRD - the eighth FEDERAL Chancellor (Bundskanzler). But not of Germany.

Someone else, who appears to agree with me, tried reversing the same fellow's entries several times in respect of Dr Adenauer. But the fellow is persistent, and since he never logs in with an identity nor from the same location it is impossible to discuss the matter on his talk page. Of course, one starts out assuming good faith. Maybe he understands little of German and less of English. But now I begin to wonder if good faith is in play here.

Questions:

Am I the one who thinks it matters?

Or are we dealing with a case of low level but persistent vandalism?

Any ideas?

(Apologies if we are dealing not with a fellow but with a female contributor: however I know what I think...)

Mit Dank im Voraus Charles01 (talk) 08:30, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Would it be a good solution to change "Chancellor of Germany" to "Federal Chancellor of Germany" for the post-war chancellors? In German, the problem doesn't exist, because "Bundeskanzler" is used as opposed to "Reichskanzler" for the pre-war era. Markussep ^Talk 08:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The same has been done to the Ministerial posts, it really looks a bit silly, and it's quite possibly wrong for the above mentioned reason. I don't think, the numbering system should be used in the infobox. A reference to her being the 8th Chancellor of the FRG in the text is quite sufficent, I think. EA210269 (talk) 09:01, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Bismarck was not the first Chancellor of Germany, either, unless you wish to say Germany didn't exist before 1871. The Electors of Mainz served as Archchancellors of Germany for several hundred years (codified in the Golden Bull of 1356). Anyway, in Germany it is not so customary to collect Kanzler offices from different periods: do you have many sources that insist on numbering Chancellors since Bismarck (and who uses such a numbering and why)? If not, it would be against policy to introduce such a numbering in Wikipedia. Kusma (talk) 09:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

In England it is not unusual to view Bismarck as the first chancellor of Germany, and we could have an interesting discussion about that. Britain and France are highly centralized states since several centuries and the tendency here is to see Germany pre-1871 as a geographical entity rather than as any sort of political one. Real life may not be so simple, but then most history tells you at least as much about the person who wrote it as it tells you about the events / people / factors included in it.

On the wiki entry, I agree we do not really need to say in the info box whether someone is the eighth or eighteenth chancellor - tho maybe 'first' chancellor is more notable. On Fr Merkel, the entry we are left with now seems to answer the problem, given the determination of one of the contributors (maybe more than one) to include the sequence. However ... we are still showing Schroeder, Dr Kohl, Helmut Schmidt etc in the info box a Xth Chancellor (not as Xth Bundeskanzler) which (again) is at best ambiguous and at worst misleading. Probably there's scope here to enter 'Federal Chancellor' for each of Fr Merkel's forerunners. I wonder if our anonymous friend will start reversing them all if one of us does that. Or ... do you see a better solution?

Regards Charles01 (talk) 06:36, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the numbering from Angela Merkel. While "8th Federal Chancellor" is fine (unless you want to restart counting at reunification), numbering the ministerial posts is just useless (the ministries have changed in number and scope quite a lot, and many responsibilities shifted around so much that pretending continuity is misleading). Kusma (talk) 06:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The Oberstdorf says it has a population of Zero (0). Is theree any confimation on this? Kingjeff (talk) 02:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

corrected --Kgfleischmann (talk) 05:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Would you say Yahoo Travel is a credible source? Here it says that the city is officially part of Austria. Kingjeff (talk) 06:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Read that again. Kusma (talk) 06:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

The part I was referring to was right at the bottum where it says, "Today, it remains officially part of Austria, but it is only accessible by the road from Oberstdorf, which is served by regular buses." Kusma, I'm not sure if I'm reading this wrong, but my interpretation is that the roads lead into Bavaria and not the rest of Austria but with Oberstdorf technically being inside the Austrian border. Kingjeff (talk) 16:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry that page states, that Oberstdorf belongs to Bavaria (Bayern), therefor to Germany and not to Austria. The paragraph, you continuously misunderstand, speaks about the Kleinwalsertal. This alpine valley is part of Austria, the page claims, that on street it can only be reached from Oberstdorf, Germany. --Kgfleischmann (talk) 18:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes. I see it now. The part that says, "...but it is only accessible by the road from Oberstdorf..." did look strange to me. Kingjeff (talk) 19:18, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Kleinwalsertal valley is a part of Austria, but only accessible from the North, from Germany (Oberstdorf), thus its an Austrian "practical exclave" or "pene-exclave". It used to have special tax free status which became obsolete when Austria acceded to the EU. -- Matthead  Discuß   20:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

There is currently a proposal for a bot that would notify WikiProjects when their articles have entered certain workflows, e.g. when they are nominated for deletion or for Good article reassessment.

The question is whether a relevant number of wikiprojects would be interested in using such a bot. You can find details of the functionality, and leave your comments, at the bot request page.

I am posting this message to the 20 largest WikiProjects (by number of articles), since they would be the most likely users. Thanks, --B. Wolterding (talk) 12:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Should we discuss this here? Has anyone contacted Wolterding? --Boson (talk) 18:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Eifel Aqueduct has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:40, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the Germany WikiProject could need someone (or two) to lead it, develop new ideas and start interesting cooperative projects. Or if you don't want to be a "leader": Just be bold and start something, and if it is fun and interesting, others will join. Perhaps you can even revitalize this talk page and WikiProject :-) Kusma (talk) 08:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello? Has this become a write-only page? Kusma (talk) 08:09, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Nope. Read it. Nothing much to add, but perhaps I'll add it anyway if only by way of encouragement. Tend to agree. But I'm conscious that the more wiki time I spend on talk pages the less of my limited wiki-time I actually spend doing something that might be construed as more wiki-useful! However - how can I put this politely? - maybe if you tell us some of your new projects, you will inspire the rest of us. My own contribution, when I get to it, tends in 2008 to have involved copying / improving car entries on European cars taking info from German wiki to English wiki, concentrating on 1950s / 1960s / 1970s cars because those are the ones I remember wanting to learn more about when younger. There are also various data tables set up in German wiki on German cars which can be copied over to the English wiki. The format is necessarily flexible because we have access to different types of properly sourced data for different types of car. It's a slow and fiddly job which has to be done carefully because of the scope for careless error. But it makes English wiki more informative, and in the process you learn more about (1) the car in question and (2) the wiki approach to tables. Obviously it's only really a useful project for car nuts, but if anyone seeks inspiration, take a look at Volkswagen Type 4 and DE VW Typ 4 or SEAT 1200 Sport and DE Seat 1200 Sport Coupé. If you're not a car nut, that's fine. Maybe you have a life instead. But feel free, just the same, to share ideas for pepping up wikipedia as suggested by Kusma. Regards Charles01 (talk) 09:28, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I am currently trying to have a life instead of leading by example here. But it would be so nice if somebody else could do it ;-) As your example shows, there is TONS of interesting material to collaborate on or to translate from the German Wikipedia. And doing it collaboratively is fun, actually. Kusma (talk) 12:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to do a bit more regarding conventions, assessment, categorization and so on. I will also try to do a bit more translation when it looks useful, so feel free to make suggestions. Any ideas on how to co-ordinate things better and get a better idea of who is doing what? --Boson (talk) 19:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey. An editor over at Talk:Spaßguerilla is challenging the use of the eszett in the name of this article. Could someone swing by and offer up another opinion on whether or not it should be in the title? Thanks. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

The Todo list at Portal:Germany/Things you can do could use some updating. Perhaps some part of the work (figuring out what articles fall under WikiProject Germany and need copyediting / NPOVing etc.) could be done by help of bots (although it isn't TOO hard to do manually). Kusma (talk) 06:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Hamm (Westfalen) railway station, a GA tagged by this project, has just been reviewed as part of the GA Sweeps Project and has been placed on hold pending the resolution of a few issues. The review can be found here. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 14:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Does this article have the correct name? Should it be Sohland am Rothstein? Mjroots (talk) 16:54, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The official page uses Rotstein; if you saw Rothstein, it represents an elder form (19th century, possibly early 20Th century). --Kgfleischmann (talk) 17:16, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

At the very least it's a redirect now ;) Knepflerle (talk) 17:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The bottom of this page has some requests that are already almost a year old (and probably out of date). Does anybody have an idea how this can be organized more efficiently? Also, some volunteers to clear the backlog would be great. Thanks, Kusma (talk) 15:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Finished tidying up the backlog of unassessed articles and assessment requests. I didn’t assess those I either started myself or contributed to, so these still need to be done. I intend to keep an eye on thelist of unassessed articles to prevent such a massive backlog in the future.

One question: since we are using the recently introduced C-class assessment, do we have to re-assess all B and Start-class articles?

Also, can someone insert the example of the C-class assessment into the quality scale? --Ekki01 (talk) 09:06, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Does anybody have experience from other projects how to best start a project-based peer review process? I think that is what is most sorely needed in this project, so we can help each other find and correct weaknesses in our articles. Kusma (talk) 09:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Although I am a bit late on this, I agree. Unfortunately I am not sure how to start. --Banime (talk) 21:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on this list (and sub-lists linked from there), but suspect some of the place names need tweaking. Assistance also needed in improving the lists by adding more images . Mjroots (talk) 12:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Cathedral of Magdeburg has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 02:52, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, just dropping by to share some good news: a newly featured picture relates to your project. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 19:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I notice that there are a lot of articles about train stations named in German, examples:

Berlin Dresdner Bahnhof Berlin Hauptbahnhof

and especially bad: Frankfurt (Main) Flughafen Fernbahnhof

Shouldn't these all be renamed into English, here on the English language wikipedia? Abc30 (talk) 21:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

These articles come under the Trains WikiProject too, and should have English titles as per established practice for all station articles. I will copy your question to that project. Mjroots (talk) 09:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

If there's no widely-used English names for a specific station, we shouldn't invent our own but go with the German title (that would save debating whether a Hauptbahnhof is a "main station" or a "central station"; Bingen (Rhein) Hauptbahnhof for example, is not in the center of Bingen, but in a part of the city that used to be in a different state when it was built). Anhalter Bahnhof also seems more widely used in English than "Anhalt station", so WP:UE would tell us to use the German name. Kusma (talk) 10:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

The List of German submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film is currently a featured list candidate. Interested users are welcome to leave their comments here. BomBom (talk) 18:22, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I just removed the "Categorize" part of the todo list at Portal:Germany/Things you can do, as the uncategorized category was empty. Can someone who knows template magic rewrite it so it automatically adds that category whenever it is nonempty? That would be great. Kusma (talk) 20:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Frederick III, German Emperor has been put up for review as a Good Article candidate --Banime (talk) 18:40, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

It is currently on hold if anyone would like to help. --Banime (talk) 18:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Note: See Talk:Frederick III, German Emperor/GA1, there are some sources needed. I'll look tomorrow - or this week - but I don't have a clue right now. Very good article IMHO. Greetings. Sebastian scha. (talk) 19:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I've already found most of the sources he asked for. If anyone else can contribute it would help too. Thanks --Banime (talk) 20:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Frederick III, German Emperor passed and is now a Good Article. Thanks to anyone else who helped! --Banime (talk) 09:43, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:52, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll do some things to revive the Frankfurt WikiProject. I added many neighborhoods, etc. to the project template. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:15, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

IMO the most obvious topic for a Frankfurt-related collaboration would be to translate Frankfurt Cathedral from the German FA or to at least expand it considerably. I am almost ashamed that our article is so short at the moment. Kusma (talk) 14:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

This Template:German IMDB title needs to be translated. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Is there anything wrong with just adapting the documentation for Template:Imdb title? Kusma (talk) 14:02, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Kusma: That will work fine - We can then merge the templates. WhisperToMe (talk) 12:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Isn't that a very useless template? The content of the German imdb is exactly the same as the English one IMO (the content was English for the one I tested, "the Trapp family"), it only translates the menus. Markussep ^Talk 15:42, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that there is now a version of IMDb that IS in German (data and navigation) - it is at IMDb.de. You can just substitute imdb.de in any imdb.com address - they both use the same t# and n#. It is a much better site that german.imdb.com IMHO, however, I am biased. I won't change anything myself, since I work for IMDb, but I thought you might like to know this. Shanimdb (talk) 21:23, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, there is a deletion request at Commons for this image which is used within this article on the ground of major factual inaccuracies. The inaccuracies are summarized at the image description, its talk page, and at the deletion request. It would be helpful to remove this image from that article or to substitute it or to express at the deletion request why this image should be kept. Thanks for your help. Cheers, AFBorchert (talk) 13:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I've commented out the img and replaced it, until further notice (this says nothing about a my POV in this matter). Greetings. Sebastian scha. (talk) 03:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I have been busy otherwise recently, and sometimes forget to select articles for the Germany portal at the start of a new month (I was five days late this time, very bad for a featured portal). I would be glad if anyone wants to take over either by adding new articles every month or by changing the portal to no longer need monthly changes (there are several mechanisms for displaying "random" featured content). Kusma (talk) 09:33, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

There's also a suggestion to start a Portal:Schleswig-Holstein but as there isn't anything on the portal yet, I have removed it from Portal:Germany/Related portals. Are there any other portals that should be listed? Kusma (talk) 09:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

This time I was just one day late... Kusma (talk) 14:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Frederick III, German Emperor recently received GA status and I have been improving it since then. My ultimate goal is to get it to FA status, but I'd like to get it to A Class in its projects first, since that would provide the most improvement to the article overall. It said to post on the talk page to ask about A class, so can anyone look at it, review it, and give me some tips that would help get it to A class and later FA class? Thanks if you can help out. --Banime (talk) 21:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

You could also try to start a project-wide peer review like other WikiProjects have it (and incorporate A-Class review into it). Happy editing, Kusma (talk) 09:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I might try that. --Banime (talk) 19:11, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

There's a peer review of this article going on right now at Wikipedia:Peer_review/Frederick_III,_German_Emperor/archive1 if anyone would like to help improve the article. --Banime (talk) 15:14, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

The peer review is closed right now but it'll be up for FAC soon! If you'd like to help it'd be appreciated. Thanks. --Banime (talk) 19:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Is there a place called Immerath in North Rhine-Westphalia? Mjroots (talk) 05:24, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Whatabout following the coordinates to Google maps and looking, if you don't believe the given official community website link? Yes, it exists.  ;-)--Matthiasb (talk) 11:24, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

There's also a village in North Rhine-Westphalia called Immerath, see de:Immerath (Erkelenz) and map. It's part of the town Erkelenz, and is being evacuated for expansion of a lignite mine. Is that the one you were looking for? Markussep ^Talk 13:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Markussep, that's the one. It's got a windmill, just wanted to make sure I created the right title for the link. Looks like Immerath needs to be a dab page then. Mjroots (talk) 08:48, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Article created today. I'd really appreciate someone who knows the area going through the article and double checking it, making any corrections / improvements as necessary. Mjroots (talk) 14:33, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I have looked at some of the references. First typo :Windmühlen am Nederrhein should read Niederrhein. Neder is Dutch!ClemRutter (talk) 21:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

But you should possibly translate the text to English. Niederrhein translates to Lower Rhine region --Kgfleischmann (talk) 22:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Is there a set of conventions you are using In List of Windmills in Saxony you use the Muehlen spelling while in Nordrhein-Westfalen you use Windmühlen. I don't understand why the type is Türmholländer- while the link is to Tower mills? ClemRutter (talk) 22:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Where are we to put the geotag?ClemRutter (talk) 22:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I modified the spelling somewhat. Of course, there is a problem that no articles about "Turmholländer" etc. exist in the English wikipedia, so it's a bit confusing.

Another suggestion to the article: I would prefer, if we repeat the linking in the column "Location". Currently, e.g., somebody who is looking for the location of "Hollands Mühle" has to scroll up until "Mühle Wessling" to find the link for Hamminkeln.

There are still red links in the column "Location", although all German towns have Wikipedia articles. Hence, the red links must be suburbs of some North Rhine-Westphalian towns. I've added two of them using the German Wikipedia to identify them. Maybe someone can continue with this work.

--Cyfal (talk) 11:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Mill names/links

• Post mills in Germany are Bockwindmühlen, Paltrockmühlen or Wippmühlen.
• Smock mills in Germany can be Sockelgeschoßholländers or Galerieholländers.
• Tower mills in Germany can be Turmholländers, Galerieholländers, Erdholländers or Bergholländers

Note the overlap for Galerieholläanders. With all the lists of mills outside the UK I've created, I've used the local term where applicable, with the term linking to what we would understand the mill type to be if the mill was in the UK. I'm not fully conversant with the geography and places in Germany, so have located the mills where they are described on the various sources. I welcome any tweaking, refining and correcting that can be done to make a better list. Mjroots (talk) 15:38, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

What an exciting possibility. Should we change it to both, ie either Bockwindmühlen (Post mills) or Post mill (Bockwindmühlen) etc? (Advice needed) There does need to be a link to each of these subtypes in the Windmill article- or a description- I'll take the list above over to Windmill, to act as a reminder- I am already asking myself whether the Windmill article is too anglocentric?

In reply to Clem - I've used whatever spelling I found on the source used, hence the variation in spelling. Mjroots (talk) 15:41, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Could we have some third party some advice- should we use mühlen or muehlen- personally I use both, the former when I am using a US international keyboard, but the latter on a UK machine.ClemRutter (talk) 18:07, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

The title of the article Gross Aktion is being disputed by two users - myself (as 74.15.29.56 and 76.64.212.106) and The PiedCow). In short, while we agree that the subject was a grossaktion, it is not known to English-speakers as ‘’the’’ grossaktion. We have suggested “Gross Aktion in the Warsaw Ghetto “and “Grossaktion in Warsaw” as possible alternatives. Poeticbent, the creator of the article, disagrees. The issue is discussed at Talk:Gross Aktion. 76.64.212.106 (talk) 11:47, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:GERMIL#Naming_conventions only provide a limited list of words. It does not lay down any guideline on how these words could be used in a article. I have been working on a Luftwaffe related article where the issue is weather you should use the German word in bracket with English equivalent outside. Also this list very few Luftwaffe related words. Ex. Staffel, Gruppen, Geschwader etc. Also absent are ranks. Can someone point me as to who can mediate or provide guideline ? Thanks Perseus71 (talk) 16:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm no official source on this, but I'd say do what you think makes the article work the best. When in doubt I'd say use the German word then provide an english equivalent next to it if it requires it. German ranks generally correspond to American ranks but not quite, so using the German rank would be more appropriate I believe. Like I said, go with your gut on what makes the article flow the best then you can always change it later if more people disagree on the talk page or something, or if its confusing for non-German readers. --Banime (talk) 11:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I was hoping this project would come up with more concrete guidelines on this matter, rather than the MILHIST parent's guidelines. Right now my peer reviewers are equally divided on the issue.

By the way do you think I could include Luftwaffe related words in that list ? My list is based on existing Wikipedia articles on the topic. Perseus71 (talk) 15:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd say go for accuracy in language over making things Anglican, with english explanations when appropriate. Which article specifically, so others and I can check it out and see exactly what you mean? --Banime (talk) 23:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I can only recognize when a german Word is used in a wrong way, but can not judge if an englisch equivalent fits, so I can not work on the guidelines, even though I find them usefull but very short. It would be nice if you could add some Luftwaffe related words to the list. I could try to check it from the german site, but to be honest I am no Airforce-guy.--WerWil (talk) 16:19, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Apologies for delay. The article in question is Jagdgeschwader 1 (World War II). I had originally used German ranks across the article with English equivalents in parenthesis. Just the German ranks subsequently. At peer review, I got the feedback that it makes the article jargon heavy. Some pointed to the Naming Conventions. Only one reviewer sided with me. Unfortunately, German military history task force does not seem to have its own clear guideline. Since its a German article, I want to go back to using just the German ranks with English equivalent first time around. Especially not all have exact equivalant. Any help is appreciated. Perseus71 (talk) 13:54, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, the German words are always more precise. The ranks generally correspond to english ranks, except for a couple that are different such as Stabshauptmann or whatever it was. If its a big problem for other editors you could use the english ranks and probably be okay. --Banime (talk) 14:08, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

The Stabshauptmann is an modern Rank which the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe of WWII had not. As far as I know there are some difficulties in different numbers of rankings of Petty Officers, Lieutenants an so on, or in finding an exact equivalent for the german Fahnenjunker Fähnrich and Oberfähnrich. The Fähnrich is no Officer but the Ensign. The Leutnant is a little bit different too, because the second Lieutenants are used in a way comparing more to german Oberfähnriche than to Leutnante.--WerWil (talk) 17:32, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Both of you are echoing my point that its best to use German ranks to remove confusion like that of Leutnant. Also Luftwaffe had a concept of Gruppen which does not have an equivalent. Since the reviewers of MILHIST lack expertise on Luftwaffe, this issue is occuring. Can both of you back me if I use German ranks with English equivalant in parenthesis first time ? Or do I have to go get the convention guidelines modified by those who can ? Perseus71 (talk) 20:11, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure I'll give support on the talk page and hopefully that will help a consensus form. --Banime (talk) 19:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't see where the discussion is taking place (is there one yet?), could you link me? --Banime (talk) 19:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Cmt The peer review is found Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Review#Jagdgeschwader_1_.28World_War_II.29, I think. Greetings Sebastian scha. (talk) 21:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Its located mostly on Peer Review Page and some more on my own talk page. Perseus71 (talk) 13:22, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Based on a search of Wikipedia's articles related to Germany, I've found some articles that I believe are about places in Germany, and could usefully have geographical coordinates added.

The articles in question are listed in Category:Germany articles missing geocoordinate data. At the time of writing, some examples included:

1. Darß/Fischland
2. Köln Messe/Deutz railway station
3. Rashi Shul
4. Rhine Neckar Area
5. Sayn-Wittgenstein
6. Sayn-Wittgenstein-Vallendar
7. Sportzentrum Maspernplatz

...and there are many more, as well. At the time of posting this notice, there were 632 articles in this category needing geographical coordinates.

Why add coordinates?

By adding coordinates, a Wikipedia reader can easily view the location on a street map, nautical chart, topographic map, by satellite photo, realtime weather map, and in many other ways. Coordinate data makes an article eventually appear in various services such as Google Maps' Wikipedia overlay, Google Earth, and Wikipedia's own internal map service. Coordinate data also helps readers looking for geographically-based data, such as locations near a reference point, or related information.

How can I do it?

The articles are all marked with {{coord missing}} tags, which need to be replaced with {{coord}} tags that contain the location's latitude/longitude coordinates; or you might be able to add coordinates to an existing infobox. You can find out how to do this at the Wikipedia:Geocoding how-to for WikiProject members. Please let me know if this is useful, or if you have any questions! -- The Anome (talk) 11:57, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Frederick III, German Emperor is now a featured article candidate if anyone would like to help improve the article. You can see the FA Review here. --Banime (talk) 21:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

This article is even longer than what its title leads us to expect, while many of the entries for the coat of arms of each individual German state are unreferenced stubs. - A split has been suggested at the article's talk page. You may be interested in taking a look at that possibility. :-)

I left an identical message at the WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology. - Best regards, Ev (talk) 19:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Bethmanns and Rothschilds, an article under WikiProject Germany, has been nominated for deletion. If interested, you may comment at the discussion here. Sorry, forgot to sign this (I am presently the main author of the Article, by the way.)--Goodmorningworld (talk) 20:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm taking a look at it. --Banime (talk) 01:15, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Just found Heinrich Himmler named as Federal Minister of the Interiour. But this Ministry didn't exist in 1943, when he acceeded to this post, and I'm afraid that saying otherwise is in violation of some basic historical facts and German (well-founded) custom.

The epochs of the newer German history, Kaiserreich (1871–1918), Weimar (1918–1945), and post-war (1945/49– ) were accompanied by major organisational and personal upheaval, so usually there is little continuity at the top level of the administration, differently from the lower echelons, I suppose.

Humbugde (talk) 18:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

The latest revision of the Article is from 13 November and shows him as Reich Minister of the Interior.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 21:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

The article Anti-tobacco movement in Nazi Germany is within WikiProject Germany. It is a featured article. I am desperately seeking more regular contributors for further suggestion on this article. Thanks. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 23:03, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

German poet and author Gottfried August Bürger, who published a version of Baron von Munchhausen's adventures, has one birthdate when you look at some reliable sources, another date when you look at others. His gravestone says January, most modern scholarly sources seem to favor December. Teasingly, a source seen at Google Books in an excerpt that is just a bit too short states that there has been a debate about this, but the excerpt says no more. The mystery deepens. Can members of this August WikiProject, with their possible knowledge of German, ferret out the solution to the December/January mystery, or at least help in finding reliable sources that mention the debate so that it can be incorporated into the article? The mystery deepens at Talk:Gottfried August Bürger#Birthdate: December 31, 1747 or January 1, 1748? The Great Debate. Reconsideration (talk) 04:29, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. I gave a reply on that talk page. --Banime (talk) 14:01, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

The museum of his birthtown (http://gottfried-august-buerger-molmerswende.de/Rund_um_Burger/body_rund_um_burger.html) says "31.12.1747". --Obersachse (talk) 15:33, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

As I usually forget to update the portal every month, I just coded a system that will display a monthly selection if a page with the correct title exists, or a random selection of previous pages if there is no such page. This will avoid ugly redlinks. The only drawback is that I use redirects, which makes it more difficult to edit the subpage from the main portal. See Portal:Germany/Test. Any ideas or comments or should I just copy this over to the main portal page and create the missing 60 or so redirects so we can display all the 35 pics and 35 articles that were displayed on the portal previously? Kusma (talk) 12:47, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand what this is about. Could you post a "for dummies" version of the above, please?--Goodmorningworld (talk) 14:35, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry... Right now, the portal displays a new page every month (and every month, somebody (usually me) has to create a new subpage). Instead, I propose a system where the portal displays random selections that change every time you reload the page (so I don't have to do something once per month). Compare Portal:Germany with Portal:Germany/Test to see the difference. Does anybody care either way, and if people like the old system, are there volunteers who want to write the new subpages? Kusma (talk) 16:34, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Automatically seems to make the most sense. It would be less work and get the job done. --Banime (talk) 16:40, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I loaded Portal:Germany/Test twice but did not see any difference. Then I discovered Purge server cache near the bottom… and it works! Very nifty. I still don't understand about the redirects, though.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 17:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

A random drive-by, but try using Template:Random portal component along with display templates as used at Portal:Association football and Portal:Football in Germany instead of Template:Random subpage. The only real difference between the two is that using the random portal one, you can specify which set of subpages to use separate from the boxtitle. The layout templates allow you to add Read More and Other selected articles links without the use of a boxfooter. Nanonic (talk) 00:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, looking through your recent contribs, now I understand about the redirects. Instead of creating a new subpage at e.g. Portal:Germany/Selected article/1 or Portal:Germany/Selected picture/4 you're redirecting that page to a preexisting subpage e.g. Portal:Germany/Selected article/2006/January or Portal:Germany/Selected picture/2006/April. Nanonic (talk) 01:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

As it is December now, I have implemented the change. When I get around to it, I think I'll just move all the old subpages to new names. That keeps them visible in the right spot in the archive (per redirect) and editable directly from the main portal. Kusma (talk) 09:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

And I've done that and switched to the awesome Template:Random portal component. Kusma (talk) 20:25, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

517 articles in Category:Germany articles missing geocoordinate data do not have geographic coordinates. Coords are useful for making the article appear on Google Maps & many other mapping services; and they allow our users to click through to see the article subject location on a map. There's a short guide to on how to add geocodes to articles ... it really is very easy to do. I hope you'll take some time to ensure that Germany is as well represented as it can be on wikipedia by fixing up the listed articles. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:24, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll take this one on. I should be able to get it done shortly since the facts are pretty straightforward. I suspect I can find a picture somewhere to illustrate it too.Wood Artist (talk) 03:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Saxon Brother War is currently a DYK on the main page. However, theres a discussion going on about the translation of the name of the war. Please see the talk page and give your two cents. It could be Saxon Brother War, Saxon Fratricidal War, or leave it German as the Sächsischer Bruderkrieg. We'd welcome all responses, thanks. --Banime (talk) 21:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

As of now we've moved it to Saxon Fratricidal War. --Banime (talk) 15:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I would appreciate a quick show of hands at Talk:List of German Americans#Jews?, I don't want to revert the user a second time without a clearer consensus. Thanks, Amalthea 01:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

We are talking about a list that has the potential to contain 51 million names- I see that it was up for deletion in August but the decision was overturned in October. Unless the criteria for inclusion is specific which it isn´t, deciding whether a group falls within those criteria is impossible. Sorry to disappoint.-ClemRutter (talk) 10:07, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Only if all 51 million are notable.imars (talk) 12:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Its worse than that- thats the figure for living Americans! ;) -ClemRutter (talk) 13:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I've expanded this article recently. this source is in German. I don't speak German but from my knowledge of Dutch I can see that there is much info which could be added to the article to expand it further. Would appreciate assistance in expanding the article further as it has been approved for DYK. Mjroots (talk) 07:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

People keep adding numbering to the order parameter for chancellors of "Germany", such as Angela Merkel and Helmut Schmidt, though there appears to be a tentative consensus at Talk:Angela Merkel/Archive 1#Something Confusing that this is not a good idea and that it is not normal to number German chancellors. The practice probably results in incorrect information (or a non-mainstream view) for any countries that, unlike the United States, have had several constitutions. For instance Angela Merkel is currently given as the "8th chancellor of Germany", which is not correct and is at odds with the template {{GermanChancellors}}; it would be correct (though unusual) to refer to Angela Merkel as the 8th chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Since this affects several articles related to Germany, I thought this might be a good place to discuss this. I would suggest a convention that German chancellors should not be numbered in the infobox. It might also be appropriate to add something to the documentation or source code of the template {{Infobox Chancellor}}. As it stands, the naming of the parameter makes it likely that incorrect information will be added repeatedly. If we could reach agreement for German channcellors , this should perhaps then be taken to Template talk:Infobox Officeholder, since it probably affects other countries (perhaps in different ways). --Boson (talk) 09:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it should not be numbered. This is not a formal convention used in sources like it is used for US presidents. Agathoclea (talk) 09:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

German orthographic conference of 1901 has been proposed for deletion. 76.66.195.159 (talk) 08:07, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

That article should be deleted. Possibly someone should translate the German article (de:Orthographische Konferenz von 1901) correctly --Kgfleischmann (talk) 11:03, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

What a wonderful example of Denglisch. The topic is important enough to remain- perhaps someone would like to adopt it as their Christmas Day Turkey! ClemRutter (talk) 12:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed that in the time where I could not give WP much attention there was quite a number of new members to the project. A belated welcome to all of you especially those that I did miss in putting a message onto their talk page.

Maybe I can remind everybody else to keep an eye onto the Members page - maybe watchlist it, and welcome new members to make them really part of the team. Agathoclea (talk) 22:37, 26 December 2008 (UTC)