Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany/Archive 6

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.

Hi there, The article, Lubeck, has a link for the river Wakenitz that currently links to the de.wiki article for that river. I looked in lists and cats of German rivers and I don't think the en.wiki has an article or even a redlink to that river so I have changed the article link to a redlink (removing the de. prefix). Is this correct? If so we need at least a stub on the river for our english wiki.

Also I have been helping a primarily de.wiki user translate the article Bad Iburg, I think we have it in good shape but if someone wanted to take a look I would appreciate it. We are having a small problem with the meaning of the smaller towns around Bad Iburg and their relationship to it. This is in the second paragraph where I use the word municipality.--killing sparrows ^(chirp!) 03:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

For the smaller towns, how about "village"? We had a discussion some time ago (over on the Infobox German Location talk page) where the non-contiguous subdivisions of a municipality or town could be called a village. The below-proposed work on municipalities should probably set up some such guidelines. - 52 Pickup 17:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Greetings! I see this WikiProject manages such articles as Bundesautobahn 1. As such, you may be interested in helping to write a notability guideline for highways. The current proposal came out of WP:USRD, and as such deals only with U.S. highways. Any help in giving the guideline a more international scope would be much appreciated. -- NORTH ^talk 01:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I have proposed there that Autobahnen and Bundesstraßen are generally notable, other roads usually not unless proven otherwise. Kusma (talk) 11:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I think I'll put a list of all German municipalities (from de:Kategorie:Liste (Gemeinden in Deutschland)) on Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Cities. Then we should check whether we have articles for all of them, and if not, create them (article names in line with Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Conventions). If applicable, I think we should create redirects from the de: article names to the en: article names. And then update the municipality lists in the district articles, and the navigation templates. Markussep 15:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please! Should we call this a "task force" and add a switch to the project template to get an overview of the status of all municipality articles? We definitely should have a concerted effort to have at least stubs for all German municipalities. Kusma (talk) 15:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. At the same time, the above-discussed issue with categorisation should be covered. Also, some navbars for districts need to be made: many areas have them (eg. {{Cities and towns in Rhein-Lahn-Kreis (district)}}, but some do not. A dedicated project for this is a good idea. Over in WP Australia, there's Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian places, which comes up with standards for location entries. - 52 Pickup 17:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Do you have an idea how to do this in a structured way? My idea was to make a comprehensive list (with de: article names), then check all the blue links manually (e.g. add a "c" if it's a correct link, and a link to the en: article name if it's different). After that, or simultaneously, we can start creating new articles for the red links (after searching for existing articles of course). Markussep 18:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you should organize all cities/towns/municipalities by Kreis. That breaks the task down into more manageable pieces. Then you can make a checklist for each municipality:

1. Does the article exist? And is it named correctly?
2. Does the article have the German Location infobox? (not suitable for anything smaller than a municipality)
3. Is the article listed in its district-specific navbar, and is the navbar displayed?
4. Is the article correctly linked on its district page?

To get things rolling, I've just put a sample of what I have in mind at Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Cities. What do you think? - 52 Pickup 08:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

It's a good idea to organize it by Kreis, it's just that it's easier to copy existing lists by state. Your table looks OK, but I think it's a lot of work (unless you have a tool that converts e.g. German navbars to tables). About the district pages, I think it's better to fix those when all municipalities in a district have been done, no need to check that for all towns separately. Markussep 09:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

You're right. Setting up tables is does not go very quickly. I like what you have done with the navbars (ie. putting them all together). That's probably the way to go. - 52 Pickup 14:12, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

We'll just have to do it district by district (not all blue links in the navbars are correct!), and make sure the disambiguations are OK. We can do the infobox checks later, maybe with AWB. I'll collect more navbars later. Markussep 14:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Maybe I was getting a bit ahead of myself. We should at least first make sure that the entries exist before worrying about the content. Once all the entries do exist, maybe we should come up with something similar to de:Wikipedia:Formatvorlage Stadt to get them all up to a certain standard. But first things first. - 52 Pickup 16:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I am letting the users of WikiProject Germany know that we have finally established a project devoted to improving Wikipedia's fashion coverage (it has been terrible), WP:FASHION. We've been around for a month or so now tagging articles for inclusion on our worklist. Since many overlap with articles about things and people German, you may have noticed.

If any of you are interested in joining, feel free. You can also help by bringing your expertise to the articles we share. Daniel Case 04:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Please help sort out DRG Class 44 by translation -there a loads of missing articles from German wikipedia . THanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 21:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

If nobody works on this, this is speediable as {{db-foreign}} under CSD A2. If anybody wants to work on it but needs more time, it should probably be userfied. Kusma (talk) 09:24, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

No one could be bothered hey? What a shame - I suppose the Germans are editing German Wikipedida not English wikipedia. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 20:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

As most project members have probably noticed, I have started a monthly newsletter and spammed it to every member's talk page. Any comments on contents or structure would be appreciated. Thank you, Kusma (talk) 12:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps a request could me made to the members who wish to have a link for the newsletter rather that the whole newsletter on their talk page? STTW (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Is there a way to set this up with as little bureaucracy as possible? If you know one, go for it :-) Kusma (talk) 08:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

The newsletter could have this option mentioned, added related text to Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Outreach. STTW (talk) 18:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

If people like the newsletter: does anybody have a bot that could deliver it or suggestions how to best set up a (opt-in or opt-out) spamlist? Kusma (talk) 12:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I run a bot which could deliver the newsletter to all the Category:WikiProject Germany members. Let me know if you need its help. STTW (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

That sounds great, but I would also like to receive the newsletter, and I'm not in the category, only on the members page (which I used as source for my AWB-assisted spam run yesterday). I hope nobody is in the category but not on the list, or I have missed them. Kusma (talk) 08:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

The recipients would be a union of the category + list. This I would be manually. STTW (talk) 18:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good! I'll contact you about details when next month's newsletter is ready. Kusma (talk) 11:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

There's currently 1200 articles in Category:Unassessed Germany articles. Please help and assess one or two articles per day so we can kill this backlog without much pain for everyone involved! Kusma (talk) 11:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Installing the script, User talk:Outriggr/metadatatest.js can make the assessment process really easy. STTW (talk) 11:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

To make it easier to find the unassessed articles, you can now also use the shortcut CAT:UNGER. Kusma (talk) 09:50, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Down to 1006. A week or two more of light effort and this will be done. Kusma (talk) 05:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

679 now, good job, everyone. Kusma (talk) 10:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I wonder whether we should change "It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited" to "It is suitably referenced". That way, reasonably good articles that do not use inline citation could be made B-Class, and we could ask for inline citations as an A-Class requirement (it is already a GA requirement). I am suggesting this because currently Start-Class is very large, containing basically every article above stub length that doesn't have inline citations. We should avoid making the B-Class criteria too hard. Or should every B-Class article be a GA candidate once it has been copyedited? Kusma (talk) 08:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Or to put this a bit differently, what are the "major points" that should be cited? I was just reviewing an article on a German town and think that stuff like population and history should be cited, but minor things like which high schools exist or what the sights are can go uncited at this assessment level. Kusma (talk) 11:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Good points. The text shown on the banner can be easily changed. The high citation requirements come from WPMILHIST, who are pretty tough on that sort of thing and see B-class articles as those which are only a few steps away from GA-class. Whether or not that should be the case here, I don't know. But a project covering a whole country has a wider range of articles than the military history project, so the B-class requirements may need to be relaxed. Maybe a list of "major points" for different article types is needed. - 52 Pickup 06:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I encourage everybody to check out Category:B-Class Germany articles needing review and try out the B-class parameters, and then come back here to comment. Kusma (talk) 09:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I've had a look at some of the Category:B-Class Germany articles needing review and also quite a lot of CAT:UNGER. I would basically be in favour of not insisting on individual citation for short articles, but there is still a problem with the first criterion (references) and to a certain extent the second criterion (content, including correctness). Often there is no clear source, or it is specified under External Links. I've come across quite a few historical articles based on the 1911 EB. These are usually lacking structure and additional material, but the main point is they often have no other references. Where the article has been taken straight from the 1911 EB with no alterations, I suppose one could take that as an adequate reference for B class. Perhaps we should explicitly acccept tertiary and primary sources for B-class. Even with the 1911 EB articles, references are a problem when it is not easy to tell what additions have been made. That is the main advantage of individual citations. I was wondering if the 1911 articles should be treated specially by the project. Intuitively I feel that largely unaltered 1911 articles should not be assessed any higher than B-class, but I'm not even sure about B-class. --Boson 15:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you all know that while tagging Kaiserliche Marine ships for WikiProject Ships, I went ahead and added your {{WikiProject Germany}} tag to any articles not already carrying the banner. --Kralizec! (talk) 05:47, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! Kusma (talk) 10:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello German Wikipedians, This is Nic Hill Director of Truth in Numbers a Documentary film about wikipedia. we have been filming wikipedians from around the world and how they interact with technology. We were recenty in London filming Jimmy Wales participating in an Oxford Debate. Now we are in Frankfurt and we hope to interview some german Wikipedians. unfortuantly we only have time to shoot on the 20th 21st and 22nd. please contact us if you or any wikipedians you know would be interested in this important film.

This is our contact: nic@underdogpictures.com

We are staying at the Best Western hotel downtown Frankfurt RM# 305

for more information heres our wiki site

www.wikidocumentary.org

-Nic Hill

Since there is now a concentrated effort at Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Cities to bring articles on municipalities/towns/cities up to standard, perhaps it is time to come up with some sort of format for these articles. At the moment, the focus is on making sure that all articles actually exist. The next step is to add content. We probably don't need something as detailed as de:Wikipedia:Formatvorlage Stadt but some clear guidelines wouldn't help. I've started up a page at here, giving what I believe to be the necessary minimum requirements for such articles. Any comments and help with setting this up would be appreciated. - 52 Pickup 15:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I would really appreciate if one of you could help with either an image of the coat of arms of Henry the Lion or a description of it. As I understand a few references in books on Danish heraldry, Henry used a coat of arms consisting of three lions, but I haven't been able to find any actual depiction or detailed description of this symbol, nor its history. If this description is true, that might mean that Danish heraldists could be correct in speculating that this insignia was related to the insignias of Canute VI of Denmark and Richard the Lionheart. Any help would be most welcome. See also the talk page of Coat of arms of England. Valentinian ^{T / C} 15:37, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I do not have a real picture of the coat of arms of Heinrich der Löwe. On some German Homepages there is a (always the same) picture of Heinrich. There his coat of arms is shown. Because his colours were a black lion on yellow ground, I do not think, that he dared to use the coat of arms of the three leopards (lions were always standing, these horizontally stretched lions heraldy calls leopards), because this coat of arms (shown in article coat of arms of England was used by the family of staufen /ghibellinia, the ruling dinasty of Emperors of the Holy Roman Empire. I do not think, that emperor Frederic Barbarossa would have liked someone else to use his coat of arms. The picture of Heinrich is shown on http://www.braunschweig-touren.de/Seiten/Heinrich_der_Loewe.htm the same lion is shown on a medal on the homepage http://www.beutler-muenzen.de/shopbilder/originale/462.jpg in remembrance of Heinrich der Löwe. This seems to be an image of his seal. I hope I could help You. Thw1309 17:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

You did indeed help me, thanks a lot. Ok, so Henry the Lion used an arms with one lion (black on yellow). It is conjecture, but it is an interesting thought if Henry's one lion, England's two (three from 1189) and Denmark's three (known from the 1190s but very likely 1 generation older) has some kind of connection with each other since all three were enemies of Frederick Barbarossa and HRR Henry VI. Then again lions might just have been "in" around that time. Thanks again. Valentinian ^{T / C} 17:22, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Please check the article Mierscheid Law. If this is not a hoax, please make that clear with good references. Thanks! --SueHay 02:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Err.... it is a hoax, it's always been a hoax, and it's supposed to be a hoax. Not that there's anything wrong with that.. doco (☏) 02:28, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I have added an impeccable citation (Bundestag) -- unfortunately only in German. --Boson 17:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Surely we could get Mierscheid Law and Jakob Maria Mierscheid to FA standard if we tried! --Boson 17:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I currently have this list in my userspace. It was userfied in March 2007 as part of this AfD discussion. The arguments for deletion, as set forth by the nominator, were that the list was: (1) unmaintainable, (2) did not have a defined focus, and (3) did not concern a subject of sufficient interest to English-speaking readers.

Since March, I have changed the article from this to this. The major changes include: updating the list based on the April 13 version of the article in the German-language Wikipedia; formatting the footnotes; adding the "Further reading" section (copied from the German-language article); and other mostly cosmetic changes.

As there's no point to the list remaining in my userspace any longer, I think one of the following options ought to be implemented:

1. Reintroduce the list into the article mainspace and merge it with List of actors from Germany. I am willing to perform the merger myself.
2. Projectify the list so that it can be used for article creation/development.

At the moment I am not sure which is the better solution, so I ask for your input. Thank you, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

If you don't merge you should consider renaming it List of German screen actors. I assume that's what you're trying to get at right now. So far as a guide for article creation, for someone like me who would need to start from scratch researching it would be more useful with less redlinks (as in, who are the twenty most important German screen actors of the 60s instead of a few hundred, cause that's where we should really start). — Laura Scudder ☎ 19:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

A partial solution to the issue of the overwhelming number of redlinks would be to delete all the names that do not have a corresponding article in either "en.wikipedia" or "de.wikipedia". That ought to reduce the length of the list by about one-third (see de:Liste bekannter Darsteller des deutschsprachigen Films). -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 21:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

This article is being put up for deletion. You can come here to join the discussion. - 52 Pickup 06:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Now it's up for merging the West Germany national team and the German national team here. Kingjeff 23:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

This article is one of the worse articles I have seen in Wikipedia. It needs to be fixed hard. Yet it has been granted "B" scale in quality, while it doesn't meet several of the criteria for this. For example, it doesn't cite any sources. We need to fix it...--Cerejota 03:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The categories at Category:German people by state are somewhat of a mess. For example, Franz Ludwig von Pfalz-Neuburg, who was born in Neuburg an der Donau in Palatinate-Neuburg, is categorized in Category:People from Bavaria. Category:People from the Palatinate is almost empty, so is Category:People from Brunswick. Joseph Goebbels, who was born in Rheydt in Prussia, is categorized as "from NRW, although NRW did not exist until after his death. It appears that we mostly categorize people by the state that their birthplace happens to be in right now, not by what state they were born in. However, we don't claim that Martin Schongauer was born in France or David Hilbert in Russia. This is somewhat inconsistent; I believe we should categorize all people by the state they were born in, both for people born in places that are no longer Germany and for people born in states of the HRE that no longer exist (putting Mozart into Category:People from Salzburg works nicely: at the time of his birth, Salzburg was an independent archbishopric in the HRE). Thoughts? Kusma (talk) 07:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

It's a nice idea, but I can foresee some problems, such as that plaguing the article on Nicolaus Copernicus - 52 Pickup 06:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

He was born outside of the Holy Roman Empire. Anyway, anybody categorizing that article under a nationality should be blocked for disruption. Kusma (talk) 06:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

True, unfortunately the talk page indicates that that particular problem won't go away soon. For people within the HRE, this could be less of a problem, but you can never be completely certain. - 52 Pickup 06:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

To get back to the original problem: if we put city subcategories in state/country categories, we run into problems. People from Dortmund can be people from Prussia or people from NRW, depending on when they were born in Dortmund. Whatever we do, we need suggestions how to make it clear what is in the category and how it is supposed to be used. As I usually don't do much category-related work, I have no idea how to deal with this. Kusma (talk) 06:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps the historical categories could be sub-categories of the modern categories? So the Prussian category would be a subcategory of "People from NRW" (and any of the other states that Prussia previously covered). Perhaps not an elegant solution, but a simple one. - 52 Pickup 07:19, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree - that also allows for multible connections. Ancient Salzburg could be sub from Bavaria and Austria. To make the scope of the category clear you can do a nice little writeup in the actual category page. Agathoclea 09:12, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I have to rethink the multible categorisation - that must be a case by case situation. I always believed Salzburg to be part of Bavaria - actually some of it definetly now is. But in that connection Tyrol is more likly relevant. Agathoclea 09:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Brüsewitz was an East German priest who set fire to himself to protest against the communist regime in the 1970s. There's a long article on him on the German Wiki. There wasn't one on the English Wiki so I wrote one, only for some cheeky person to tag it for 'notability'. I added the German sources to boost it but can someone with better German than me read the German article on him and add some info to the English article? There's a lot of google stuff on him, but mostly in German. Thanks. Nick mallory 10:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

It's done. Thank you Thw1309 Nick mallory 15:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I've suggested removing this page from WikiProject Germany; the rationale is given on the article's talk page. Please let me know what you think. SGilsdorf 02:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I have added the France and HRE template. While personally I think some overlap is certainly condusive to building Wikipedia, all HRE emporers before Otto have a somewhat hazy connection to Germany. Agathoclea 07:29, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Given your last comment, though, this begs the question as to why we'd include the pre-Ottonian emperors in a project which is defined (essentially) on the basis of a modern cultural and political entity. I can see Charlemagne and his eastern successors (e.g. Arnulf of Carinthia), since their regna included substantial territories east of the Rhine. The W. Frankish ones (Charles the Bald etc.) and Franco-Italians (Louis II, Lothar II, Wido, etc.), however, really don't have anything to do with the core mission of WikiGermany, other than their possession of a title also held by "German" rulers later on. Perhaps this is a discussion that needs to take place in a different format, though... SGilsdorf 14:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, if you look at the end of the article Hamm and some other city articles you will find in red letters "Cities in" and then in blue the rest of the categories. Any ideas how to get rid of this?--Gabriel-Royce 14:38, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The problem was that there were square brackets around [[North Rhine-Westphalia]] in the infobox. I removed them in Hamm, problem solved (and the state is still linked in the infobox). Markussep ^Talk 15:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, yes I see. Thanks --Gabriel-Royce 19:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The article Unstruttal was an amalgamation of the de:Unstruttal and de:Verwaltungsgemeinschaft Unstruttal which are totally unrelated (ie different states). Incoming links were in favour of de:Unstruttal so I changed the content to that. Unstruttal (Verwaltungsgemeinschaft) will need a new article and/or renaming (see incoming links). Agathoclea 13:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, fixed it. Actually, I originally created this article about the Verwaltungsgemeinschaft, but Attilios picked the wrong infobox earlier today. How about a naming convention for these collective municipalities? Several versions are in use now, e.g. Nordhümmling (not ambiguous), Samtgemeinde Hankensbüttel (ambig. with Hankensbüttel), Bederkesa (Samtgemeinde) (ambig.), Amt Kirchspielslandgemeinde Marne-Land, Amt Großer Plöner See, Schlei (municipality) (not really correct, Schlei is an Amt, not a Gemeinde), Loreley (municipality) (same), Kirchheimbolanden (administrative unit). I'd prefer one of these options:

• exactly the same as in German wikipedia: (Samtgemeinde Hankensbüttel, Amt Kirchspielslandgemeinde Marne-Land, Verbandsgemeinde Loreley)
• the "bare" name if unambiguous, the German generic behind it in parentheses if ambiguous: (Hankensbüttel (Samtgemeinde), Marne-Land, Loreley (Verbandsgemeinde))
• the "bare" name if unambiguous, an English generic (to be determined, I used "collective municipality" when I created the category) behind it in parentheses if ambiguous: (Hankensbüttel (unit), Marne-Land, Loreley (unit))

Markussep ^Talk 14:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I would go with town (german name of unit). What I am more worried about is the number of articles where the municipality and the association is handled in one rather than seperate articles. But we can worry about that once we complete the municipalities as such. Agathoclea 14:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

If noone objects, let's pick town (german name of unit) (so that's my option 2 then?). About mixed articles, I'm to blame for most of them. When I started creating articles about German municipalities, I thought nobody would be interested in the municipalities within an Amt, but I was wrong. But let's solve that later, it's easy to pick the lists of member municipalities from the updated district articles. Markussep ^Talk 16:50, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Munich was a candidate for Good Article status. The main reason why it failed was because it lacks inline citations. I'll be working on it. Kingjeff 19:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I just stumbled onto the territoral changes happening today. As it is a lot to take in and reference I made a new template {{Kreisreform2007}} to tag the articles affected until they can be re-written. The template will need some fleshing out but I am off to work for the rest of the day. Agathoclea 15:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I also started the following article Kreisreform Sachsen-Anhalt 2007 as a (part)-translation for the de-wiki version. I'd appreciate a more English title, if anyone could suggest that. Agathoclea 00:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I moved Dessau yesterday to Dessau-Roßlau and made a redirect from Roßlau. Before I proceed any further I wondered if we want to keep those two articles as articles about boroughs and make a new one about the new city. In particular there is a second city amalgamation as part of the reform, which sofar I just tagged with the above template. Agathoclea 13:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)