Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany/Archive 22

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 15

←

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Hi all, I'd like some help getting Schauenburg Castle (Oberkirch) to a better standard, but I know next-to-no German and in my opinion translation services aren't very good. Any help would be appreciated, especially reference improvements. Thank you all, Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:04, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anarchyte, I'd be glad to lend a hand, but I must say the dewiki article isn't very comprehensive either. I can start some translation, but if you need any specific help, do let me know. MikeLynch (talk) 08:01, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much MikeLynch. One thing that could be useful is a translation of the part of Burgen und Schlösser Mittelbadens that contains info on the Nine Years' War (I believe it's written as Pfälzischen Erbfolgekrieg / Palatine Succession War there). There are five or six lines that are visible from this search. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:06, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I was able to download the whole book, actually. There are a good couple of pages dedicated to the Schauenburg ruins. (I downloaded it from the Uni Freiburg library here, don't know if you can download it as well). Once my poor eyes are more used to the Fraktur script in the book, I'll get started :) . MikeLynch (talk) 08:35, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Great! Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:04, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm on it. –Vami_IV✠ 12:34, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Reading through this as I am interested in history, seen all of indi nidel videos and stuff like that, anyway I was reading this as I am interested in studying the ideologies these days and I like to read these things/watch videos that do not have a bias intent. Based on reading this it seems the evidence is out of proportion or scope at many points in this page (many others to be sure), Im not a nazi/fascist I just like to read these without someones opinion, we all know about the bad stuff these days, got it enough in primary/college, so dont feel offended when I want the facts laid out without someones views pushed on me. Cheers - Galexy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.52.206.87 (talk) 16:42, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Please comment at Talk:Flat rate withholding tax (Abgeltungsteuer)#Title and wikilinks are wrong. English native speakers with knowledge or a background in securities accounting and capital gains taxation especially welcome. Mathglot (talk) 05:29, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

An article that is of interest to this project has been nominated for community reassessment. The discussion can be found here:

• Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Hermann Graf/1.

Interested editors are invited to weigh in. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:51, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Additional opinions would be appreciated. The discussion can found here:

• Talk:Rotterdam_Blitz#Requested_move_9_July_2017

K.e.coffman (talk) 23:30, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

I would like to help this project. What can I do concretely? :-) --orschiro (talk) 04:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello @Orschiro:, and welcome to the project. Portal:Germany/Things you can do has a list of open tasks, but is quite outdated to be honest. If you are interested in any wider Germany-related topic area (like architecture, music, history, politics, etc.), I would suggest editing in this particular area. Just pick any random article of your interest :). You could also look into Wikipedia:WikiProject_Germany/Popular_pages, a list of popular high-traffic articles, where improvements would be most visible and beneficial to a larger readership. GermanJoe (talk) 20:52, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

One area that is often neglected are the various portals, Portal:Germany and the various state and regional portals all listed on that page. They show what articles are missing or need improving; and the portals themselves need a bit of maintenance too. HTH. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:57, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Will take a look at your links. :-) orschiro (talk) 04:25, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

I've added four new portals recently – Portal:Elbe-Elster, Portal:Lusatia, Portal:North Palatine Uplands and Portal:Pomerania – which editors are invited to use to build and improve those topic areas. I'm also automating those which have an "article of the month" or similar so that they rotate automatically through 12 articles. Even on German Wikipedia, editors don't seem to be able to manually change the articles every month, but this is a neat low maintenance way of keeping the portals fresh. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:55, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

I attempted to translate some of the German Wikipedia article for Fußgönheim into English using Google translate. I don't know German, so I'd appreciate it if someone who does could take a look. Thanks, Degeno (talk) 20:11, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

For a machine assisted translation it looks rather well translated. A few important points though: 1) the german wiki cannot be used as a reference, 2) we do not pipe-link to articles on deWiki. If we want redlinks to be augmented by such links we have templates like {{ill}}. Finding the correct link on edWiki is usually quite easy by following the link on deWiki and then follow the interlanguagelink. Apart from that someone with experience in correct attribution will have to take a look. Agathoclea (talk) 20:40, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

I've also created two more cleaned-up Google translations of deWikipedia articles for small towns in that area. They're in my userspace since someone warned me away from machine translations, so I'll wait until a German-speaker can double check them. However, I'm pretty confident of their general accuracy since the language seemed simple.

They are User:Degeno/Hochdorf_(Hochdorf-Assenheim) and User:Degeno/Assenheim (Hochdorf-Assenheim). I'd appreciate it again if someone could take a look. - Degeno (talk) 19:31, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

		Women in Red is pleased to introduce... A new initiative for worldwide online coverage: #1day1woman
		Create articles on any day of any month Cover women and their works in any field of interest Feel free to add articles in other languages, too Social media hashtag campaign: #1day1woman (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 10:57, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Editing Thích Nhất Hạnh led me to looking for "European Institute of Applied Buddhism in Waldbröl, Germany", which has no article, and I wound up trying to copyedit Waldbröl. (I do too much of that. Distractions, distractions.) Anyway, Waldbröl § Neighbouring Municipalities says

The main place 'Waldbröl' is much larger than the main places of all neighbouring municipalities and serves as shopping town and point of service. Beginning with 'Reichshof' in the North and moving on clockwise, the neighbouring municipalities are Morsbach, Windeck, Ruppichteroth and Nümbrecht.

(I've been taking out the quotation marks around names of places and things.) "Main place" is unclear in English. Evidently he article was originally translated from de:Waldbröl in March–April 2005 by Mrfinch~enwiki, a native German-speaker with level 1 (basic) English competence who has not edited since 29 September 2009.

My German is also at about level 1. My first impulse was to correct "The main place 'Waldbröl'" to "The town Waldbröl center", but I'm not sure that would be correct. Many online dictionaries translate "Hauptort" literally as "main place", which is not helpful here. I found one with more useful choices—

main place

• [einer Insel etc.] main town
• [einer kleinen Insel] chief village
• [einer Region] chief city

But while I'm able to clean up text that I understand, I can't turn it into good English if I don't really know what it means. So I'm asking for someone here with good English as well as native or very good German to go over the article and clean it up that way. I'm just going to finish this pass over it tonight (23:20 here in Philadelphia), and then I plan to be done with it.

Many other articles certainly have the same problem; Wiehl, for example:

Wiehl was slammed by the Siegburger comparison of 1604 finally of the rule Homburg and was subordinated with it to the house Sayn-Wittgenstein. In 1815 the Viennese congress assigned the Homburger little country which existed practically only of the municipalities of Wiehl and Nümbrecht to Prussia. Wiehl was in this time still an agriculturally stamped place of village character whose population surplus had to live by travelling work. Only the use of the water power of the Wiehl by the Ohler hammer since 1860 as well as stream production since 1895, the connection with the railroad network in 1897 and the foundation of the mountain broads clever axis factory of Wiehl (BPW) in 1898 created the condition for reinforced growth in population.

You might consider scanning through them (as if you didn't already have a lot to do) for this kind of cleanup. --Thnidu (talk) 03:22, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Thnidu. There are a lot of German articles like this which have been coarsely translated and need cleaning up. The problem is compounded because there isn't always a simple translation of German municipal terms. In the case of towns, the German word Stadt can refer either to the town itself or the borough it administers with all the outlying villages. To distinguish they use the word Hauptort or Kernort to refer to the "town itself" excluding the other villages. Anyway I've re-translated that section so it makes more sense. --Bermicourt (talk) 08:58, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Treaty of Siegburg

This is also mentioned, but there's no article for it and I can't find anything on the web. See talk page. --Thnidu (talk) 04:02, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

The relevant German article is de:Siegburger Vergleich, apparently about a treaty in 1604 that resolved a territorial dispute (with some additional dynastic issues for good measure). It would probably help to add Template:ill links to sentences mentioning this treaty. GermanJoe (talk) 05:16, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. See your talk page; I went there first. --Thnidu (talk) 05:42, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

This is currently the #2 top-cited missing 'journal' in WP:JCW/MIS. This does seem like something that should have an article on Wikipedia. If it is, WP:JWG will have a lot of help on how to write the article.

Now I don't speak German, and de:Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins doesn't exists, but Google reveals plenty of sources. If someone could create this entry, that would be amazing!

Thanks in advance! Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

@Headbomb: de:Deutscher Palästinaverein seems to be the publishing society for this journal, here is an English-language overview for this journal on their homepage. Both society and journal could probably be covered in one article - just mentioning it here for anyone interested in writing about academic societies. GermanJoe (talk) 10:14, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Creating a publisher + journal article in one place is one possibility (journal should be covered in the publisher article). Two articles might be better/easier to create, but I'll let whoever writes them decide. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:11, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Can someone put Michael Wulf out of his misery and comment on the ongoing AfD. It keeps getting relisted for collecting cobwebs Agathoclea (talk) 09:36, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

...may be interested in this discussion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:36, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Your comments are requested at Talk:Head of the State, 1848-1850#Disputed title. The article appears to be a machine translation, and so does the title. Mathglot (talk) 10:34, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

An article which may be of interest to members of this project—Founding of the German Empire—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Mathglot (talk) 00:08, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

So I've been puzzling over pl:Cyrkuł. It states "Cyrkuł (German:Stadt-Viertel) common in Germany since the times of Hohenstaufens and later during Habsburg Monarchy. Polish word Cyrkuł is based on German zirc and latin circulus." But the pl:Cyrkuł links to de:Kreis which is circle - clearly a bad interwiki (#1, I'll report second one later and I hope someone here knows how to fix it). German wiki does not have an article on de:Stadt-Viertel. The Polish lead also makes an unclear reference to Imperial Circle. Anyway the Polish article discusses the territorial division of Austrian Partition/Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria in years of 1772-1809 (there is also a handy nav template at pl:Szablon:Podział administracyjny Nowej Galicji). So what is the proper German (and English?) term for 'Cyrkuł'? I think in lieu of English term a German is preferable to Polish, but I can't even start translating the Polish article until I figure the proper English/German term... Oh yeah, the second interwiki problem is this: pl:Królestwo Galicji i Lodomerii doesn't list a German article, it links to en:Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria which supposed to link to de:Königreich Galizien und Lodomerien but in fact ends up taking one to de:Galizien - could it be that de wiki is missing a separate article on that topic? PS. If you reply here, please WP:ECHO me. Tnx, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:42, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

@Piotrus: Stadtviertel is the correct spelling. The Hyphen is often optional, but Stadt-Viertel is very unusual (at least nowadays). But a neighbourhood is pretty small and the article wouldn't be a good interwiki link either. I just removed the wrong interwiki link to the geometric de:Kreis from the polish article. However, the German Word Kreis seems to be correct (and it is still in use). The word Kreis is used in de:Westgalizien ("das Gebiet [wurde] in folgende Kreise unterteilt"). In de:Kreis (Gebiet) is a red link ("Kreis, die Verwaltungsbezirke nach der Verwaltungsreform Maria Theresias ab 1748, an die alten Böhmischen Kreise angelehnt bzw. aus ihnen entwickelt, wurde in den 1860ern durch die Politischen Bezirke ersetzt.") that should be the missing article you are searching for. Yes, there is no article "Galicia and Lodomeria" in de.WP. The reason might be: "Das „Lodomerien“ im Namen des österreichischen Kronlandes Galizien und Lodomerien geht auf Wolhynien zurück. Allerdings lag Wolhynien nie im österreichischen Herrschaftsbereich – der Name wurde einfach aus der ungarischen Königstitulatur entnommen, da Ungarn im Spätmittelalter eine Oberhoheit über das Gebiet beanspruchte." (source: de:Wolhynien). -- Reise Reise (talk) 19:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

I wonder if they're using Kreis as short for Landkreis? Mathglot (talk) 05:09, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Today both forms are used as official names for districts (depending on the state; see Districts of Germany):

• in North Rhine-Westphalia Kreis is used, for example: Kreis Steinfurt
• in Lower Saxony Landkreis is used, for example Landkreis Emsland

Kreis might be used as a short (Kreis Emsland) but depending on the region it might be unusual to do so. Kreis was used in several times, combinations and meanings to describe an administrative subdivision (see de:Kreis (Gebiet). The word Landkreis was probably derived from Kreis to distinguish from the other meanings. When I was browsing through the "Habsburg Monarchy" articles in German WP I only found Kreis (no Landkreis). Depending on time and region other names (like "Grafschaft") were used for similar districts. German WP has an article about de:Geschichte der Kreisbildung in Deutschland (history of the creation of Kreise in Germany). -- Reise Reise (talk) 06:33, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Landkreis is the official administrative word in Germany for "district" or "county" (some English sources use "county" which is helpful because "district" gets used for Viertel, District, Bezirk, etc.). However there are exceptions: Schleswig-Holstein and NRW use Kreis instead. Also Kreis is used in compounds e.g. Kreistag ("county council") and Kreisstadt ("county town"). HTH. Bermicourt (talk) 06:55, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

@Reise Reise, Mathglot, and Bermicourt: Thank you all for your comments. So what would be the best title for en version of pl:Cyrkuł? [[:de:Stadtviertel] links to neighbourhood which doesn't seem right, at least not for my purposes. Honestly, the best title I can come up right now is the Administrative division of the Austrian Partition territories or perhaps better Administrative division of the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria (subsection to Kingdom_of_Galicia_and_Lodomeria#Administrative_divisions). PS. I am sorry, as I don't read German, I didn't understand why de wiki doesn't have an article on that entity? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:57, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

The picture of the Institute's building is outdated. They have a new one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.202.82.231 (talk) 08:41, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

@178.202.82.231: Which institute? —Kusma (t·c) 10:16, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi! Please take a look in commons:Category:Atlantis Magni Tomus Tertius (Biblioteca comunale di Trento), new high-resolution files uploaded by User:Francesco Serra (BIBCOMTN) from the Public Library of Trento.--Alexmar983 (talk) 04:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

I was looking at the Stug 3 gun an as it said that ¨high-velocity shells carried much less explosive and had a lower blast effect for use against infantry or field fortifications.¨ After looking at the guns wikipedia pages it lists L/24 gun HE ammo having 0,454 kg explosive vs the KwK 40 HE 0,66 kg of amatol. Is this a mistake or is the idea that high-velocity shells having less HE content a misconseption or based on different guns? I think the M4 Shermans 75 mm M3 gun had 680g HE Filler compared to the 76 mm which had 0.41 kg of HE filler. As ive looked this seems to be the only expextion and might it have caused the misconseption? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.157.134.89 (talk) 13:32, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Should the categories Ashkenazi Jews, German people of Jewish descent, Jewish atheists, Jewish philosophers, Jewish socialists, Jewish sociologists be added to this article?Talk:Karl_Marx#RfC RolandR (talk) 11:36, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

The article Battle of Strasbourg (506) has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bermicourt (talk) 18:44, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Please note that there was no kind of "German" Army until the foundation of the "Kaiserreich" (2nd German Empire" in 1871. Each sovereign country (eg. Bavaria, Prussia) had its own army and its own distinctive uniform and rank grades!141.91.129.5 (talk) 06:34, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi. In November The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There will be over $4000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. If this would appeal to you and you think you'd be interested in contributing new articles on German women during this month please sign up in the participants section. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate and raise money to buy books about women for others to use, this is also fine. Help would also be appreciated in drawing up the lists of missing articles. If you think of any missing articles for your project please add them to the appropriate sub list Missing articles. Thankyou, and if taking part, good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:09, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

I've put FM up for peer review with a view to getting comments which could enable it to be taken up to FA. All opinions highly welcome.-- Smerus (talk) 14:43, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

• In the text "X was a German footballer" about a person who played only in GDR?
• in categories - East German footballers is a subcategory of German footballers, so we should choose one of them. There is no reason to use parent- and subcategory.Xx236 (talk) 14:23, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Article in question is Günter Hoge - yes he should have both categories. He was not East German 1945-1949 or 1990-2017, he was German. GiantSnowman 15:14, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Surely you can have a German person who was an East German footballer? --Bermicourt (talk) 22:25, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Can you describe an East German footballer as a German footballer and use both categories? an article should be categorised as low down in the category hierarchy as possible, without duplication in parent categories above it. (You may modify the category tree if you want to use both categories.)Xx236 (talk) 06:41, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

To "fix" the category tree would require something like adding the categories "German (before 1949) footballer", "West German (1949-1990) footballer", "East German footballer" and "German (after 1990) footballer". That would be precise, but annoying. Having both a category and its parent on some page seems better to me, and it describes the historical situation (East Germany was a separate state that then joined the state called "West Germany", which is now usually called "Germany") better than pretending that "West Germany" and "Germany" are totally separate entities. There are good reasons that our category "tree" isn't a tree. —Kusma (t·c) 10:03, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

To be precise, (West) Berlin was an entity neither belongs to West or East Germany, despite it may have footballer from West Berlin that represented FRG. For the cat of Günter Hoge, his entire career was spent in East Berlin and East Germany, and represented East Germany, looks fine to leave him at East German footballers cat (or diffuse each East German footballer from German footballers cat, unless they were actively played after 1990s). Germany is less complex than Yugoslavia which is a unification not dissolution. Matthew_hk tc 10:16, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I think we're over-complicating it. If someone played international football for East Germany, they're an East German(y) footballer. If they played for Germany or West Germany at any stage, they're a German(y) footballer instead or as well.Bermicourt (talk) 14:34, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Please, have a look at this discussion. The German name is ok... but not if used as the main title for our Wikipedia article. The article has to be titled in English and, in the body of text, this museum also has to be mentioned by an English name... isn't that obvious? Please go to the discussion and share your views. Thank you. Kintaro (talk) 08:40, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Rüdesheim am Rhein will be shown on the Main page with a featured picture soon, 22 Nov. I'll take care of the red links church and Jung. There are castles ... - Also: almost no inline citation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:16, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Other editors may have different views on this, but a lot of the "Notable XYZ" trivia should be trimmed. "Celebrity X stayed a night in Rüdesheim and ate a delicious burger" (exaggerating a bit) is not an encyclopedic piece of information. Unfortunately this bad habit is quite common in de-Wiki village articles, and English good-faith translations tend to copy it. If noone objects, I'll grab an axe and trim some of the excess fluff in the next days. GermanJoe (talk) 16:25, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

I took Boosenburg (please check, I am no castle expert, and refs most welcome), only one castle left, last red link in the navbox? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:21, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

I've created the castle article and will expand it later. --Bermicourt (talk) 13:20, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering if this image is about the Lehrerleut article. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 15:13, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Given its origin, it seems likely that this is some person named Maendel from a Lehrerleut colony. (There are definitely Hutterites named Maendel). —Kusma (t·c) 16:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Germany

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod ^talk 12:35, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Just created Portal:Westerwald along with a couple of dozen articles. Feel free to add more or improve existing ones. --Bermicourt (talk) 18:40, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Would it not make sense to merge Decision on the Capital of Germany and Berlin-Bonn Act? Both are pretty short and incomplete and lots of overlap Abcmaxx (talk) 19:37, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for German destroyer Z31; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 12:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for German destroyer Z32; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 12:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Hope this is the correct talk page. I am looking for someone who can assist with Draft:Matthias Schranner. Cannot read German and hope that someone can look at the references and let me know if the page meets WP:GNG in their opinion. You can ping me here or leave a note on my talk page. I really appreciate the help is this is one of many backlogged drafts at AfC. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:32, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Th problem was discussed above in Is a GDR footballer a German footballer?. There existed two different teams in any sport at that time - West and East-German, two championships, two league systems. Any friendships were supervised by political police. Xx236 (talk) 14:12, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes. All things GDR are tagged with the WikiProject Germany banner and with the GDR taskforce parameter. The old duck test is also worth mentioning, and so is the fact that both nations had the name "Germany" (Deutschland) in their names, and were reunited in 1990 into Germany. –Vami_IV✠ 14:20, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for German destroyer Z4 Richard Beitzen; please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 11:56, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I've launched a request to delete the article "Narodil se Kristus pán" right here. The article already exists at Freu dich, Erd und Sternenzelt, and "Narodil se Kristus pán" should be merged into it. "Narodil se Kristus pán" was initially a redirect created by User:Gerda Arendt that went to "Freu dich, Erd und Sternenzelt." FWIW "Freu dich, Erd und Sternenzelt" is on the Main Page today, in the Did you know... section. Narodil se Kristus pán was expanded from a redirect seemingly with nationalistic intent by User:Heptapolein after the first one was created, with no consensus from anyone else. There is not even any other articles that link to it. It would help to get some input on it's AfD page. -- Gokunks (Speak to me) 00:03, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_January_29#Years_in_the_Holy_Roman_Empire which may of interest to this project. Tim! (talk) 18:13, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi, what does this surname mean in German? I'd like to add the meaning to the Knollenberg article, but I can't find it anywhere. Also IPA pronunciation would be nice. Thanks! DrVogel (talk) 04:36, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Might I recommend using a Dictionary? Break up the words when you look them up. I can tell you right off the bat that "berg" is "mountain," and I think "Knollen" is plural so I would try just "Knoll." Whatever it means, I'd hedge my bet on the surname originating from somewhere hilly. –Vami_IV✠ 05:19, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

You need to be careful. The present spelling of a surname may be quite different from its original spelling or the words it came from. I'd check it in reliable sources first. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:26, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bermicourt, yes, exactly, can't be naive about it. I left my message here after searching for sources unsuccessfully :( DrVogel (talk) 00:25, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

The singular is Knolle, which describes a tuber, especially a potato or a (manganese) nodule ("Manganknolle"). The spelling stays the same when you connect both words. Both words are very common and so is the combination of the two words. There are several hills and streets with the name in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands. The surname is not very common in Germany. Most (5 out of 26) of the telephone book entries are located in Vechta (district). The politician Friedrich Knollenberg (de) (1878–1950) was born there. -- Reise Reise (talk) 17:38, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Reise Reise, that's very helpful, I've been able to make a number of improvements thanks to your suggestions. Are you a native German and are you familiar with IPA-de ? Would be nice to have the IPA DrVogel (talk) 19:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm from Germany. I'm not very familar with IPA, but looking at de.wiktionary entries "Knolle", "Berg", "Kapellenberg" and "Galgenberg" the IPA [ˈknɔlənˌbɛʁk] should be correct. -- Reise Reise (talk) 19:29, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Ah ok, cool. That would have been my guess, but I wasn't sure if any of the sounds change when you join up the 2 words. That happens in many languages and I don't know about German. I've added the IPA now! DrVogel (talk) 19:52, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I can't read IPA, but I think the stress should be on the first syllable. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:53, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

The version given by Reise Reise has primary stress (the one on the first syllable) and then secondary stress at the start of the second component. To my untrained eyes, that looks more or less correct. DrVogel (talk) 19:57, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Kühl. --Bermicourt (talk) 21:38, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I've just posted this comment on the talk page of this article:

I've made two substantial changes to this article. The first is that I've removed as much of the contributions of the editor HenryGarden1000 as I could, since their edits are suspect - one particular one I removed the source did not support the claim made. Secondly, I've removed the material based on the writing of a single historian, Thomas Weber, which appears to me to be promoting WP:FRINGE theories which are not accepted by the community of historians.

I suggest that those who have a good amount of knowledge about this subject matter take a very close look at the article and continue to chip away at material which is not well-sourced, is fringy, or outright incorrect.

Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:16, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

For a while now, I've had the idea of really organizing the WikiProject in the image of WikiProject Military History via a Coordinator or team thereof. I thought about theming it after German politics (IE the head coordinator is the Chancellor), but decided against. Now I wonder if having a coordinator for every State is workable, but probably not. In any case, I would advise for a Coordinator staff myself, Gerda Arendt, GermanJoe, and Bermicourt, with honorable mention to Auntieruth.

Coordinators would be responsible for the management and policy making of WikiProject Germany and would be elected yearly by voting within the WikiProject. They would throw their hat into the ring by making a section on an Election page with why they think they're qualified and there answer questions posed to them by other editors, and could withdraw themselves from the running by removing their section from the page. Very briefly, Coordinators would be the nucleus of the WikiProject.

Also to be considered is a Librarian or Librarian in Residence role for the WikiProject (inspired by Susan Barnum aka megalibrarygirl so that the Library page on our WikiProject is maintained and so editors without their own library could receive the guidance of the Librarian.

–Vami_IV✠ 08:21, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for naming me, but have no extra time for coordinating functions. I do the project's DYK, voluntarily. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:42, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

In my view, the Coordinator(s) are just the people who show up and do the project's maintenance work. I don't know how we can "elect" somebody to volunteer to do work for the WikiProject. As this is a wiki, there is no need to be "elected" to do policy making -- if a policy needs making, we can just come up with one. We could ask people to state what work they regularly do for the project. (These days, I only regularly check the article alerts and this project talk page, but I used to maintain the portal and the project template and can still be called on for any project-related admin task). Then we could find out which tasks are most understaffed, but then we still need volunteers for those tasks. If anyone wants to do some tasks, they should just boldly start doing them -- being "elected" will give them no special privileges or powers anyway. —Kusma (t·c) 17:08, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I do appreciate the thought and would be glad to help out where I can - although I have spent most of my Wikipedia time in other areas lately. But similarly to Kusma I believe it might be better to collect some more ideas on possible project-level activities instead of holding formal elections. It would also be useful to get a simple headcount of how many regular and semi-regular editors would be interested in more project-based activities. I am estimating that we have about 1 or maybe 2 dozen regular editors here (+ an unknown number of occasional contributors), but I could be totally wrong about this guess. Anyway, I do think it's a good idea to talk about the current status and discuss possible improvements in specific areas. Thank you for bringing this topic up. GermanJoe (talk) 23:32, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Kusma and GermanJoe that elections and the position of "coordinator" is unneeded. The project is large enough that many active members do not even know each other. There is plenty of bot-generated output releated to the project to keep all of us busy for a very long time, so even more editors active in the field never even look to this page. Many years ago we had the idea of a newsletter. That died as there was not enough input. Agathoclea (talk) 08:04, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

I will take onto myself the role of Coordinator, then. I am already behind the scenes fighting our assessment backlog and editor cooperation could eliminate the other assessment backlog. –Vami_IV✠ 08:31, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Be careful with sports seasons though, they might contain a list of teams or games but are not a "list" in themselves. Agathoclea (talk) 09:25, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Noted. I will take note for future reference. Pinging Jhall1 to notify him, too. –Vami_IV✠ 10:14, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Anyway, as you are looking for work :-) a few watchlist suggestions:

• User:AlexNewArtBot/GermanySearchResult
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Article alerts
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Cities/Changes
• Portal:Germany/Things you can do
• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Germany articles by quality log
• User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Germany (For the satisfaction of a job well done)

strictly voluntary. Agathoclea (talk) 12:05, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I have added these to my watchlist and created a special bookmarks folder for them. –Vami_IV✠ 13:23, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Project changes

I got back to filling in the WikiProject sidebar and so building the WikiProject last night. I remodeled the Members page and added our Coordinator section to there, and built a few bells and whistles to go along using WikiProject Military history's example. On the Users page, I again used WPMILHIST to build the Userboxes section with all the userboxes associated with the Wikiproject that I could find. As I write this, I consider adding language userboxes given the nature of our WikiProject. –Vami_IV✠ 02:12, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

(Personal) Goals

Since there's a bit of activity about the WikiProject, I have a goal in mind that I want some help in accomplishing: I want to eliminate our Quality and Importance backlogs and keep them empty or below 100 articles so that further goals can be set and taskforces or special projects devised.

Here's the links to both:

1. Category:Unassessed Germany articles
2. Category:Unknown-importance Germany articles

If enough interest manifests, I think we can, in an organized manner, knock out these backlogs rapidly and hopefully keep them six feet under. –Vami_IV✠ 02:12, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Would anyone have an interest in translating the featured article Elcor, Minnesota for the German Wikipedia? Since many of the immigrants who settled here were from Germany, I think having the article translated in this language is important, especially for any relatives of former residents who may be looking for information about the town. Thanks! DrGregMN (talk) 21:40, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

I would personally recommend posting a request to the German-speaking Wikipedians' board. –Vami_IV✠ 03:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Not a terrible important matter, but as there is some activity here at the moment: As the article base is growing the increase in percentage terms of "Low-importance" articles is rising disproportionally. Should we address this by tweaking the assessment rules or is everyone ok with that? E.g. so far we rate municipalities as "Low" and towns as "Mid". Agathoclea (talk) 08:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

I've been seeing this as well. As Coordinator, I would like to propose a change to Importance assessment: Where the Germans live shall be marked Mid-importance. –Vami_IV✠ 10:13, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

The problem with that is, that most municipalities are not even known within Germany and do as such not contribute to an understanding of the general subject Germany. I am more looking for a marker that would would help us to identify those municipalities that stand our from the rest and while not being towns are on an equal perception. This goes equally for other fields - what could be seen as being known within Germany. Agathoclea (talk) 10:30, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Traditionally, the Importance rating was assigned to how well something was known outside of Germany, for example my currently only Good Article, Lichtenstein Castle (Württemberg), is marked Mid-Importance because of its imitator castles. –Vami_IV✠ 22:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

That one is borderlining to a 'High' importance I would say. Agathoclea (talk) 08:58, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Agathoclea What do you propose for the exception(s) you mentioned? It isn't clear to me what you meant when you mentioned it on my talk page. –Vami_IV✠ 07:49, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

I've begun a Peer review of my article, Ludwigsburg Palace, here. I would appreciate some commentary and/or suggestions. –Vami_IV✠ 03:41, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Are there any German websites that collect freely available scholarly articles like Persee in French? I can read some German and would like to access German scholarship on Buddhist Studies.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 20:39, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

I am not entirely sure, but maybe some of the links or information at de:Wikipedia:Recherche can be helpful to find German-language information. Most of the links are not topic-specific though and would require more in-depth research. Hopefully others have better ideas. GermanJoe (talk) 20:49, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Joe! Appreciated.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 23:19, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

I am also interested in finding more German-language databases. Here's Zeno.org. –Vami_IV✠ 04:06, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Nice, Vami_IV!--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 07:16, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Editors at this project might be interested in the discussion concerning the proposed deletion of all Portals across Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#RfC:_Ending_the_system_of_portals. --Bermicourt (talk) 17:55, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

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 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)

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)

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)

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:

• Category:10th century in Germany and Category:10th century in the Holy Roman Empire
• Category:10th-century establishments in Germany and Category:10th-century establishments in the Holy Roman Empire

...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

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)

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 de.wiki 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. 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)

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)

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)

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.

Background

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)

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:

Cons

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.

Pros

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

I have nominated Rudolf Vrba for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Catrìona (talk) 01:17, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

I have nominated Werner Mölders for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Catrìona (talk) 03:02, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

@Catrìona: Thank you for notifying the WikiProject in both FAR instances thus far. I will be (trying to) monitoring the situation at Mölders's talk page. –Vami_IV✠ 12:53, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians - If you have some extra time, kindly examine the article on the noted conductor and composer Samuel Adler (composer) who was born in Germany and immigrated to the United States in 1938 while fleeing the chaos in Europe prior to World War II. A request for an "Info Box - person" has been processed and was included on the article but appears to be subject to continuous deletion (perhaps because Adler is still alive?) Kindly consider using the "Info Box academic" template {{Infobox academic}} to rectify this problem as suggested here Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Composers, or perhaps assigning an "Infobox -Person" from the WikiProject Germany (or "Info box Musical Artist") since Adler was also an active German/American conductor who founded the historic Seventh Army Symphony Orchestra which helped to implement cultural diplomacy in Germany after World War II. He was awarded the U. S. Army's highest Medal of Honor for services to Music, commended by Dwight D. Eisenhower for his work in Germany and Europe, published several academic books on Orchestra, and Choral conducting, was a member of the faculty at several leading music conservatories including the Eastman School of Music and the Juilliard School for over 60 years, and was recognized by his academic peers by receiving several Honorary Doctorate of Music degrees as well as membership in Sigma Alpha Iota and Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia. I would be grateful for any insights which you might wish to share on the articles talk page here Talk:Samuel Adler (composer) regarding whether an infox should be assigned to the article from WikiProject Germany. Many thanks for your thoughtful consideration and contributions to the discussion along with my best wishes for your continued success on Wikipedia in the future With warmest regards...104.207.219.150 (talk) 21:00, 27 August 2018 (UTC)PS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.207.219.150 (talk) 104.207.219.150 (talk) 21:25, 27 August 2018 (UTC)PS

This may be of interest to the members of this group. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:42, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

See Talk:German resistance to Nazism#Split proposal: "German opposition to Nazism" and "German resistance to Hitler" for a discussion of the proposal to split German resistance to Nazism. HopsonRoad (talk) 20:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Interested editors are invited to participate. For background, please see:

• ANI:OberRanks_and_fabricated_sources
• User_talk:Future_Perfect_at_Sunrise/OberRanks#Central hub?

--K.e.coffman (talk) 02:36, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

For a reference to a German-language publication, is it common to translate things like "Band", "Herausgeber", "Seite" etc., even if the publication title remains German? Jmar67 (talk) 18:27, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 18:28, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Would someone provide some input at Talk:Deutscher Commercial Internet Exchange § Deutsche or Deutscher ? please? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 02:59, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

• The page is obsolete, the majority of sources is older than 8 years.
• Regional/federal features are descrbed in sevearal sections. I believe they should be mentioned at the beginning.
• The definition of German culture probably includes the Austrian one (German languge). Such definition is unsourced, Austria is mentioned mainly in the Music section.
• The differences between East and West arn't mentioned (with the exception of Religion).
• Minority cultures aren't described (with the exception of Cusine).
• Informations about immigration are obsolete.
• German industry and German products (cars) belong to German culture.Xx236 (talk) 06:06, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

An RfC on moving the year from the end to the start of article titles (e.g. South African general election, 2019 to 2019 South African general election) has been reopened for further comment, including on whether a bot could be used move the articles if it closed in favour of the change: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation)#Proposed change to election/referendum naming format. Cheers, Number 57 15:36, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

G'day all, a RfC has been started on the Milhist talk page regarding mentions in the Wehrmachtbericht, a daily broadcast about the activities of the Wehrmacht during WWII. Your input would be welcomed. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:21, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, I have introduced the List of music museums, and a number of German museums are written in German (also a number in Dutch) but not in English. Are there users at this project that like to write some of these articles? Best regards, Ymnes (talk) 17:23, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Grüß Gott, Coordinator here. I am interested in translating articles for Germany and for Austria. Is the present list complete? –♠Vami_IV†♠ 18:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

That's geat to read! Museums are opened and closed each year, and a complete list is not really possible in practice. Nevertheless, I have quite exhausted my search for German and Austrian music museums. For these two countries I guess it's quite complete. All the museums from there you see now, have been written in Dutch yet. In case you find some more museums, and write those articles, I will take care for Dutch versions of the museums too. :-) Thanks for your help! Ymnes (talk) 18:35, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

In order to not only ask, but to give something back as well, I have written the Composers Quarter Hamburg and the six associated museums for this project. Ymnes (talk) 10:40, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

We seem to have been stuck for over a decade at Talk:Carl Friedrich Heinrich, Graf von Wylich und Lottum#Prime Minister of Prussia?? - so I'm hoping a native German speaker could have a quick look at the German-language sources and help clarify the position this person had held. TIA. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:28, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi! I often come across a German word I don't know; this time it's one I can't find in the dictionary (Chemnitz) either: Bruttrieb. My guess is that it means broodiness, but I'd really like to be sure. The context is "Eigenschaften und Leistung: Guter Fleischansatz. Jahres-Eierleistung im 1. Jahr 150, im 2. Jahr 120 weißschalige Eier. Kein Bruttrieb.". Thank you! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:44, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

The translation is correct. "Bruttrieb" is the instinct to brood (German noun Brut). The word is also used in this article: de:Deutscher Sperber. -- Reise Reise (talk) 19:47, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Reise Reise, most helpful. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:10, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:34, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Could a native German speaker please look at the Walter, Dirk reference in Spanish solution? The title and a quote are from the Google automated translation tool; I'm sure a native speaker could do a better job. Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:44, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello everyone. I just created President of East Germany. It would be really appreciated if members of this WikiProject review the article, and add/remove something if they find it appropriate. --Sundostund (talk) 03:51, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Is anyone belonging to this WikiProject familiar with this bank? It's already been drafitified once, but was subsequently re-created. The creator, however, has been indefinitely banned so draftifying it again will probably eventually end up in it being deleted per WP:G13. So, if there's enough here for a stub or some better sources (even sources in German) can be found, then it probably can be cleaned up and kept. Otherwise, I'm wondering if it should be WP:AfD instead. Googling the bank's name gets a fair amount of hits, but most of them seem to be to websites in German; so, I'm not sure how reliable they are for English Wikipedia's purpose. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:18, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

We (I and an IP editor) have a bit of a disagreement about the usage of a lead image in the lead of this article. Please see the talkpage for more information - additional feedback to form a consensus (pro or contra) would be appreciated. GermanJoe (talk) 15:36, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

I have started a formal RfC at Talk:Germany–United States relations#RfC on lead image. Any additional input would be welcome. GermanJoe (talk) 05:15, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Please look at Talk:Georg Heinrich Gottlieb Jahr. I think that article should be Gottlieb Heinrich Georg Jahr, maybe with a redirect from "Georg Heinrich Gottlieb Jahr". Jahr's books were published in the USA with name "G. H. G. Jahr", so maybe that caused some confusion. - Outlier59 (talk) 03:38, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

This discussion may be of interest to members of this project. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:16, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi! I added a map of government agency head offices at Politics_of_Germany#Agencies. I think it is best to exclude those in Berlin and possibly Bonn as there may be too many agencies in one place.

However I am not entirely certain about the Hydrography agency: does it have all of its head office in Hamburg, or is it evenly split/co-official between Hamburg and Rostock?

I also wonder if BND publicly still has a presence in Pullach, or if it publicly removed all presence in Pullach.

WhisperToMe (talk) 06:40, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Here is the German list of federal agencies on de-Wiki, if you want to go crazy and add them all :) - or atleast the ones with English-language main articles. The English equivalents should be relatively easy to find via the Wikidata links and of course Category:German federal agencies. GermanJoe (talk) 20:31, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Erich Hartmann, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --K.e.coffman (talk) 22:57, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion going on about whether it would be appropriate to include material about a supposed connection between the political party Alternative for Germany and the administration at German Wikipedia. Your feedback would be appreciated at this discussion. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 08:20, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

The article on Ernst Troeltsch has been rated by various WikiProject groups as "Stub class", but might be long enough to be brought up to "Start class" now (see the talk page on this article). Vorbee (talk) 16:34, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Helmut Wick, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --K.e.coffman (talk) 18:00, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Hans Waldmann (fighter pilot), an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --K.e.coffman (talk) 17:02, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

G'day all, Helmut Wick has just been delisted as A-Class at Milhist, per Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Helmut Wick. You might want to check it against your own A-Class criteria. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:44, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Joachim Müncheberg, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. –dlthewave ☎ 21:05, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I have nominated Heinrich Bär for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. –dlthewave ☎ 17:04, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Johann Mickl, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:02, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

A Request for Comment has been launched in the Talk:Immigration and crime in Germany#RfC: The "By Region" section talk page section. Please contribute, it would be beneficial to have more input from editors with German language skills. AadaamS (talk) 14:11, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Hans Philipp, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. –dlthewave ☎ 12:08, 11 March 2019 (UTC)