Archive Pages	from	to
Talk:History of Germany/Archive1	20 May 2003	20 May 2003 (UTC)
Talk:History of Germany/Archive2	from May 2005	through end O'2006

	History of Germany is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 19, 2004 Refreshing brilliant prose Kept April 11, 2005 Featured article review Demoted Current Status: Former featured article

WikiProject History	(Rated B-Class)	HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
History portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.  ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Christianity / Lutheranism	(Rated B-Class)	ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:ChristianityWikiProjectChristianity articles
Lutheranism portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.  ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Lutheranism (marked as Top-importance).

WikiProject Germany	(Rated C-Class, Top-importance)	GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Germany portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.  C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale. This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: | b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = <yes/no> | b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy --> = <yes/no> | b3 <!--Structure --> = <yes/no> | b4 <!--Grammar & style --> = <yes/no> | b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.  Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contents 1 Sidebar 2 Outdated stuff 3 Territorial changes of Germany 4 Third Reich 5 Removed {Original research} tag 6 Early German History 7 Your input requested: Patrician/Patricianship 8 What happened to ancient history? 9 Chancellor 10 Lede rewritten 11 Proposed merge of Germany (terminology) 12 Lede length

[edit] Sidebar

This is just a suggestion... I'm not going to change it, I only want to see what people think. On the side bar listing each category of German history, shouldn't "A new era" and "The darkest hours" be changed to something a less emotive. Given that this site is made to emulate an encyclopedia, shouldn't it be a little less dramatic? Jclingerman

I agree, besides being POV by definition the terms don't really fit, "A new era" for the republic of Weimar is certainly misleading. Nevfennas 05:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Outdated stuff

1. Moved outdated stuff to Talk:History of Germany/Archive1. djmutex 18:45 5 Jul 2003 (UTC)
2. Ditto Material from May 2005, through end O'2006 into Talk:History of Germany/Archive2. // FrankB 18:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Territorial changes of Germany

I am having a debate with User:Aborvegyro regarding his desire to add information about "Territorial losses from the Middle Ages to modern times" to Territorial changes of Germany.

My stance is that Territorial changes of Germany is about changes to the territorial borders of Germany after the formation of the German Empire in 1871. User:Aborvegyro disagrees.

I note that the lead to this article says

"The History of Germany begins with the birth of the nation from Ancient Roman times to the 8th century[citation needed], and then continues[citation needed] into the Holy Roman Empire dating from the 9th century until 1806.

This would suggest a stance closer to User:Aborvegyro than mine.

I also note that the lead continues on saying

At its largest extent, the territory of this empire included what today is Germany, Austria, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, western Poland, the Low Countries, eastern France, Switzerland and most of northern Italy. After the mid 16th century, when it had lost many former territories, it was known as the "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation".

This suggests the concept of a German empire in medieval times.

Please refer to the discussion on Talk:Territorial changes of Germany and express your opinion there.

Thank you.

--Richard 08:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm removing the citations from the first paragraph of this article, the are not needed. That infermation being stated is general public opinion, and just common sense. Any problems with the removal of the citations please let me know.--Lucius Sempronius Turpio 03:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

This is a pretty animation, if you like blue. But I don't see that it adds much, and it implies that East Prussia was lost before Eastern Silesia. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:00, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Third Reich

Why was Nazi Germany called the Third Reich? Hitler was not emperor of Germany and there was no Imperial court. A dictator, and an emperor are two completly diffrent things. --Lucius Sempronius Turpio 03:54, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The German expression "Reich" is not necessarily equivalent to the English expressions "empire" (German: Kaiserreich) or "kingdom" (German: Königreich). Historically, the term was of course associated with some kind of monarchic rule. However, it gradually became associated with specific countries like France (German: Frankreich) or Germany, rather indepently of the regime. As a matter of course, during the Weimar Republic the term "Deutsches Reich" (or just "Reich") was still associated with Germany, in spite of the newly introduced republican regime. The term was also used to distinguish between the federal (Reichs-) and the state level (Landes-) of government (today the equivalent is "Bundes-", meaning federal). There was also an "imperial court" (Reichsgericht) till 1945; however, it lost some of its influence to the Volksgerichtshof. After 1945, the term came out of use, but had some kind of afterlife, the most prominent example being the Deutsche Reichsbahn of the GDR.

The expression "Third Reich", moreover, is also ambiguous. First, it is a simple enumeration with the first and the second Reich being the Holy Roman Empire and the German Empire, respectively. Second, it also bears a mythologic meaning, see Joachim of Fiore and Arthur Moeller van den Bruck for further reading. Levimanthys 21:01, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

There is in fact a Wikipedia conclusion that neither Third Reich nor Nazi Germany should be used since the official contemporary English usage was German Reich. The Third was only so referred to for propaganda purposes, and Nazi applies only to the Party since most Germans were not members of it. I would suggest doing substantial edits throughout the articles so affected to reflect this. I will be posting the proposal at Projects Military history to ask editors to amend this--Mrg3105 (talk) 01:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

• Nonsense!!! "Third Reich" is widely recognized and used historic term extant in many histories, newspaper articles and so forth. Sorry, But!!! Eliminating the term is revisionist at best, and idealistic in the extremis. Many English-Germany translation problems exist (Prince v. Furst, for example), one more won't make a difference, and is a disservice to readers googling such terms. They need explanations and educational exposition, not elimination to "your standards of thought". We are after all an educational NPO at the foundation level, and that had better be the purpose of this sister project! // FrankB 18:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Removed {Original research} tag

re: At (under) section: /* Early modern Germany */

my comment: --{{Original research|date=October 2007}} Unsubstatiated on talk, no {fact} taggings in sections following

• No need to add more! // FrankB 19:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Early German History

I have noticed that this article is lacking any reference to Germany occurring before 100 B.C. I have noticed that the Spanish article has much less overall information, but contains facts about early Paleolithic, Neolithic, and Bronze Age populations in Germany. Could it be of importance for this information to be included, and could it be that it was somehow accidentally excluded? If necessary, I will translate the information from the Spanish article, although I am not sure that it is referenced very well. Please respond.Hoopboyjode (talk) 22:29, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi all, I propose a change regarding Cardinal Richelieu, since he was not a regent for Luis the XIV, but a prime minister and virtual ruler of France during reign of Luis the XIII. Richelieu died shortly before the Luis XIII. My proposal is to delete reference to Luis the XIV, and substitue it by comment "prime minister and virtual ruler of france by reign of Luis the XIII". Please made the change if you agree, or let me know if you have any comment regarding it. I if find neither contradictions nor the change done within next two weeks I will do it on my own. Martin

Note: "quarrel between Slovaks and Czechs as a pretext for taking over the rest" There was a quarell; however only Czech were taked. Slovakia for astablish as a souvereign state, which was obedient to Hitler. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.99.82.78 (talk) 08:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your input requested: Patrician/Patricianship

Under a proposal made by me, the pages Patrician and Patricianship -- whose names presently are not specific enough -- will be renamed as follows:

• Patrician → Patricians (Ancient Rome)
• Patricianship → Patricians (Middle Ages)

(I dropped an earlier proposal for merging the two pages.)

For the rationale for renaming the pages and a couple of associated other changes, as well as the opinions of user:Johnbod, please see the discussion page at Talk:Patricianship.

My question is, do people here support my renaming proposal, or if not support it, at least would not oppose it.

Thanks in advance for all replies--Goodmorningworld (talk) 14:33, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What happened to ancient history?

Is there a reason the this article begins with the Franks (486)? I have would thought German history would begin with Arminius and the Teutoburger Wald (AD 9). Most articles of this type include a section on prehistory as well. Kauffner (talk) 12:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. On 25 October 2008, the section was deleted by an IP from New York. The German article begins with Homo heidelbergensis and Homo steinheimensis, BTW. -- Matthead  Discuß   16:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chancellor

If you are interested in the politics/history of Germany, you might want to take part in the discussion on Chancellor of Germany (Federal Republic) regarding the splitting of the original Chancellor article. --KarlFrei (talk) 09:45, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Lede rewritten

I rewrote the lede, mostly because the earlier version was too long. (The top of the table of contents should be visible in the opening screen.) I also thought the earlier version focused too much on the 19th century and 1871, as if it wasn't really Germany earlier, and that there quite a bit of flabby writing. It is still relentless political, which, if there is consensus, I'd like to offset with some mention of achievements in science, music, or philosophy. Kauffner (talk) 05:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed merge of Germany (terminology)

I propose to merge Germany (terminology) into this article. The terminology needs to be treated in the context of the respective sections about the history of Germany. There are also some WP:UNDUE issues that can be more easily settled if the article is merged into this article. Some of the content of the article Germany (terminology) will probably have to be moved into sub-articles of this article.  Cs32en  17:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC) this is the won that wtrote this andiriet

[edit] Lede length

The consensus of this discussion seems to be that 500 words is a good length for a lede. The current lede clocks in at 706 words, which means that it is actually quite a bit longer than several of the "bad example" ledes cited. A well-design article should never give you a screen full of just text -- you should be able to see the top of the table of contents in the opening screen. Some of stuff I tried to cut wasn't contributing anything anyway: "Germany is located in central Europe." If you're in Germany, it's central, just like China is the "central nation" for Chinese. But otherwise, it could Northern Europe, or Western, or even Eastern (for example, in the context of the Dreikaiserbund). Also, I hardly think the French occupation of Saarland is ledeworthy. Kauffner (talk) 15:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)