Talk:IG Farben Building

message: It is Hessen not Hesse. There is no Bundesland called Hesse in Germany. I am correcting this now. 
Hesse is the term for inhabitants of Hessen: I live in Hessen, I am a Hesse. Plural: We live in Hessen, we are Hessen.
*Before you do, please check out Hesse which says that Hessen is the german for Hesse (implicitly english).--Mcginnly | Natter 20:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hessen

message: Unfortunately I wasn't able to read and comment on this article before it received its Featured Article status. But here are some comments that I hope will be of help. The article is certainly good but there are a few lingering problems that I think should be addressed.
*1. The section "Early history" describes the future site of the building, and so this section is not an early history of the building itself. I recommend renaming the section: The site.
**Amended--Mcginnly | Natter 10:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably best to remove this altogether. I reckon you're right, that it just has to do with different ceiling heights, but it's weird enough to distract and adds nothing. Pinkville 01:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think what it's saying is the variation of storey height on the ground floor is reflected in the roof line of the top floor. --Mcginnly | Natter 01:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, okay. If you can demonstrate that, then reword it to reflect that fact. Otherwise, leave it out, I'd say. Pinkville 02:07, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

text: This is still simply perplexing. Pinkville 01:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your changes to 11-14 are so much better! Pinkville 01:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments post-FA

message: This is a big conspiracy theory here. You have the biggest office block in Europe, helping the Nazis big time, and the Allies never actually bomb it? --MacRusgail 14:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bombing

message: Can we have a map for the "rumours" section, showing the location of the IG Farben Building, Grüneburgpark, station and anything else that may be relevant? - Samsara (talk • contribs) 16:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea - go for it.--Mcginnly | Natter 08:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: Dear fellow contributors
MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether or not dates are autoformatted. MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this. 
There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:
Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. Does anyone object if I remove it from the main text (using a script) in a few days’ time on a trial basis? The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. Tony (talk) 14:35, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't care less - go for your life if it makes you happy! --Joopercoopers (talk) 16:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to remove date-autoformatting 

message: The windows of the building decrease in height with each storey. Does anyone have a citation to why? I added that this is the case as you can see it if you go there an from the photos... But I heard it was to make the building look bigger. Anyone know of a book or site that discusses this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthisd (talk • contribs) 21:25, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Building 

message: I have deleted the sentence that states that the European Central Bank's possible use of the building was blocked by the British Government, which was attempting to have the ECB based in London. The reference backing this statement is itself not accurate. By the time that the question of a possible use of the I.G. Farben block arose, the EU Council had already decided to locate the ECB in Frankfurt, but without any decision as to where its premises should be in that city; that matter was left open until the ECB itself decided several years later to build its own custom-designed premises at Frankfurt's Großmarkthalle, which site the ECB then purchased from the City of Frankfurt. In the late Spring of 1994, the ECB's forerunner, the European Monetary Institute, was already operating out of what is now known as the Eurotower, that it had rented on the Willy-Brand-Platz pending a decision on its permanent home. The then Mayor of Frankfurt am Main, Andreas von Schoeler, publicly suggested during a re-election campaign in 1995 that the I.G. Farben complex would make a good site for the future ECB, given that the US Army were in the process of withdrawing from Frankfurt and the City could have used the proceeds of its sale to the ECB. This proposal - from my first-hand knowledge as a senior official of that Institute and the ECB - caused considerable annoyance to the Management of the EMI precisely because of the building's historical associations (and for other, practical reasons), and because the very premature question of the permanent premises of the ECB had not even been discussed by the EMI Council (composed of the governors of the EU national central banks). Von Schoeler lost the mayoral election and the issue sank without trace. Giving the site to the Goethe University was a far more appropriate and indeed excellent solution! (Further information can no doubt be gleaned from the morgues of the Frankfurt press of that period.)
Ironically, the ECB's eventual choice of its permanent premises raised a similar issue. The Großmarkthalle, the city's main wholesale fruit and vegetable market and also a famous listed building of high architectural merit, had been used during the Second World War as a concentration and deportation point for Frankfurt's Jewish population. Deeply conscious of this, the then President of the ECB, Wim Duisenberg, approached the city authorities and Frankfurt's Jewish community jointly, even before the purchase of the Großmarkhalle had been concluded, in order to obtain agreement that this part of its history should be commemorated by the construction of an appropriate memorial at the site. Following a design competition, such a memorial is being incorporated into the structure of the ECB's new premises.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ingramip (talk • contribs) 16:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The IG Farben Building and the European Central Bank 

message: According to the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force article, this organisation was disbanded on 14 July 1945. Official documentation on SHAEF supports this. This article states: "From 1945 to 1947, the IG Farben Building was the location of the Supreme Headquarters, Allied European Forces." I'm assuming that the Supreme Headquarters Allied European Forces is the same thing as Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (if it's not then correct me, I can't find any evidence for these two being separate organisations however). So how come this article states SHAEF was located here until 1947 when the organisation was disbanded in 1945? BabyNuke (talk) 07:54, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  SHAEF 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on IG Farben Building. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060615032606/http://www.baader-meinhof.com/timeline/1972.html to http://www.baader-meinhof.com/timeline/1972.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:27, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on IG Farben Building. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060901081711/http://www.hsc.edu/academics/modlangs/johnsondirk05.php to http://www.hsc.edu/academics/modlangs/johnsondirk05.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719122525/http://www.dw.dk/projekt.asp?refid=193&PageType=1&galnr=0 to http://www.dw.dk/projekt.asp?refid=193&PageType=1&galnr=0
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061001231529/http://www.uni-frankfurt.de/english/about/campuses/westend/index.html to http://www.uni-frankfurt.de/english/about/campuses/westend/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060828091714/http://web.uni-frankfurt.de/zsb/sfb/ig-farben-gebaeude.html to http://web.uni-frankfurt.de/zsb/sfb/ig-farben-gebaeude.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060612223258/http://people.cornell.edu/pages/hlm7/ffigfarbenpics96.html to http://people.cornell.edu/pages/hlm7/ffigfarbenpics96.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070715151302/http://www.uni-frankfurt.de/studium/filme/film-begruessung-01.mpg to http://www.uni-frankfurt.de/studium/filme/film-begruessung-01.mpg
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:28, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "The IG Farben Building was also the headquarters of the CIA in Germany, which led to its sobriquet 'the Pentagon of Europe'." Why so? The CIA isn't based in the Pentagon, at least not officially. Surely, the sobriquet must come from its association with the US Army (or US forces in general).146.227.230.1 (talk) 22:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  CIA? Pentagon 

message: Derzhprom, which is also in Europe, seems to be superior in both volume and office area. Ncpie (talk) 12:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest office building? 

message: This featured article was promoted in 2006 and has never been reviewed since. The main contributor has left Wikipedia 10 years ago and there seems to be no one actively maintaining the article, as the unanswered questions left on the talk page show. 
*there's uncited text in the article;
*the "Future" section does not make sense, since it's about events in 2018 and in 2020;
*In Further Reading:
: - if those German books were used at some point to write this article, then the article should reflect this with inline citations to them;
* References need work (bare urls, The Demon under the Microscope needs a page number);
* Something is wrong with reference 3, it looks like an index of some kind so I can't check its info;
* Ref 21? "Translated from "Ein eisernes und steinernes Sinnbild deutscher kaufmännischer und wissenschaftlicher Arbeitskraft"", is this a book, an article? 
* What makes angelfire.com a high quality reliable source? 
* The lead has details about IG Farben's industrial production (the dyes, the oils, the explosives, the , the first antibiotic) that are not mentioned in the body of the article;
* I'm not sure about the "Rumours" section; for instance, , if deemed relevant/supported by a better source, should be mentioned in the construction phase. The same for the other rumours. The way it is now, it looks like a list of very diverse unconfirmed trivia, from Einsenhower to the existence of basements(?).
The article needs work to rise to current FA standards. RetiredDuke (talk) 18:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I am very concerned that this article no longer meets the FA criteria. A future section should probably not be in any article, per WP:CRYSTAL, and it is outdated. I am also concerned about the references, and I think the sources in Further Reading should be assessed and included in the article.  are you interested in bringing this article to FAR, as I have already nominated an article this week? Z1720 (talk) 14:56, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey , sorry for the delay. I've been holding off from nominating articles at FAR because I don't know if I would be able to carry on with the nomination if the article gets picked up for improvement (coincidentally, my nominations do tend to get picked up). I've been busy lately, but I'll be back to active business at FAR whenever I can. RetiredDuke (talk) 11:45, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't worry about it . I hope you will be able to return soon. One option might be to nominate one article at a time, and if another editor starts working on it, you can ping me and I will conduct a more thorough review. That way there's still some articles going through FAR, but it won't get too busy. Z1720 (talk) 12:06, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA in need of review