Talk:Germany/Archive 10

message: The article uses the word "government" in two different senses: one, the general apparatus of the state; and the other, the executive branch. (The former is typically American usage while the latter is typically British or Commonwealth usage.)  While either is formally correct, mixing the two can lead to confusion.  Thus I plan to replace the second usage with "executive" or the like.  Are there any objections?
In copyediting the article I've tried to avoid changes that could alter the meaning of the text, but if I inadvertently change the meaning please let me know. Thanks! Raymond Arritt 00:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that consistency is the most important factor, so I agree with you. TSO1D 00:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Query from copyeditor 

message: The part of the article talking about German colonies established after the crowning of Wilhelm II is in so far wrong, as Wilhelm II’s crowning took place in 1888 - after the death of emperor Friedrich III (who - I think - is worth to be mentioned). Most of the German colonies were established before 1888, during Bismarck was in charge. (Bismarck himself was not interested in colonies, he only saw the economical reasons.)
 
It is also not completely correct to say, that Wilhelm I was forging the foreign policy of the empire. Indeed Bismarck did. In Germany we talk about the "Bismarcksches  Bündnissystem" referring to that policy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.129.158.246 (talk • contribs) 
:Ok, I removed the reference to William II in reference to the beginning of imperialism, and just left the dates in. Also, I said that it was Bismarck's policy. Although it was William that had ultimate authority, I agree that the policy was shaped by the Bismarck. TSO1D 23:46, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with your assessment, however I don't really want to expand the history section any further. It might be better to add this information to a subarticle, such as German Empire. TSO1D 15:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Revolution and Second German Empire

message: there's a nazi germani flag and coat of arms at the beginning of the article.Eist345 07:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect the page was semi-protected and Eist345 was a new user.--Boson 07:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  nazi flag and coat of arms 

message: Says Germany's motto is "Heil Hitler" Bawad1 08:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nazi flag and bogus motto! 

message: Someone vandalised the beginning of the article by posting the Nazi flag and a false motto
:No worries. Such things are gone about as fast as the server can refresh (i.e. plenty fast). MadMaxDog 13:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Any specific reason why the See Also is empty? 
Suggestions:
*Holy Roman Empire
*German Empire
*Weimar Republic
*Nazi Germany
And that's just history. I know that the See also should not get too long, and most of the See also would already be linked to within the article. On the other hand, the see also IS supposed to be a shortcut - even to terms linked within the article... Cheers, MadMaxDog 13:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's all there, it's just hidden. You see in the see also section there is a topics in Germany line, if you have to click show on the left. I wish I knew how to be open automatically, but I see that all other countries have it hidden on default anyway. TSO1D 14:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia:Guide_to_layout#See_also — 'The "See also" section ... should ideally not repeat links already present in the article.' Lars T. 15:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, but the new topics in template has been used in many FA country articles (ex. Canada, and it looks better than just having a list of links. And there seem to be no complaints about this matter anywhere else. TSO1D 15:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: See also

message: There is no mention of the well known German trait of reserving a space on the sun lounger by putting a towel out very early. Is their a reason this has not been included? --I love football 1982 00:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am sorry, but I am not familiar with this element of German culture. Could you please elaborate. TSO1D 01:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Well thats your point of view. Here is the BBCs view  and here is the British Newspaper The Gaurdians view . Amuzing cliche or not you cannot deney that it is a reference to Germany in popular culture. Also I am sure we can allpoint to far looser references to articles in popular culture than this referenced by the BBC and The Gaurdian--I don't like football 16:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fortunately the article Germany does not have an "In popular culture" section. Kusma (討論) 16:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Having reviewed it I think this is a topic that should be discussed on the German People wiki not the main German one here.--I don't like football 16:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: In Popular Culture

message: I see kraftwerk is listed, and as of right now, the band rammstein are the biggest german rock music export.
so if you could add that to the section, it would be great. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.94.165.163 (talk) 03:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rammstein may be selling well, but Kraftwerk had a pretty substantial influence on modern pop-music. Lars T. 18:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: David Hasselhoff is not German. Lars T. 18:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I always wonder who got the idea of Germans loving David Hasselhoff. That's a really strange cliché He might have been in Germany once, but that was about 20 years ago. And I bet he then also had fans anywhere else. And now he is almost forgotten. So it would be the same when someone says  that Americans fancy Wolfgang Petry ;-) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.235.70.237 (talk) 22:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

text: As a German, I first came across the cliché of Germans liking Hasselhoff when I was to Australia. I told them there was no connection whatsoever between Germany and Hasselhoff - and was proven wrong because one of his albums _has_ been Top 1 of our album charts for some time. However: No German remembers because it had little or no real public impact - and most Germans actually never liked the actor too much ;) Still: I do not see any necessity to mention Hasselhoff in the Germany article as long as my firefox states that the word 'beer' is not even used once - there're far more relevant topics being omitted --80.137.220.199 09:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  please update music. 

message: "school attendance is compulsory for twelve years"
You can quit school with a "Hauptschulabschluss" after 9 years.
(But I am not too sure wether this applies to all German states. However all states have some kind of degree before the 12th year of school).
Addition: You don't even have to do that: You only have to attend school for nine years. Then you can quit even without any degree (at least in some states).
:You're right, in most states 9 or 10 years in a Gymnasium/Realschule/Hauptschule are compulsory. However, if a pupil leaves one of these schools before he's 18, he has to attend a Berufsschule. So actually all underages have to go to some sort of school, at least until he or she has got "Berufsausbildung" (training qualification).
I have another remark to make. The text says:
In contrast, secondary education includes four types of schools based on a pupil's ability as determined by teacher recommendations: the Gymnasium [...]; the Realschule[...] the Hauptschule [...], and the Gesamtschule [...].
In fact, the important types are Gymnasium, Realschule and Hauptschule. Gesamtschule is a type of school where those three types are combined - in most cases that means that those three schools share one building or campus. The Gesamtschule  is an exception, as at most places there is only Gymnasium/Realschule/Hauptschule The teacher doesn't give a recommendation for Gesamtschule, he gives only recommendation to Gymnasium, Realschule or Hauptschule according to the student's performances. In addition, this recommendation is not obligatory. The parents can decide which school their kid shall visit.--84.56.237.68 14:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are wrong indeed. It is compulsory to do twelve 12 years of school in Germany. This is the same for all German Bundesländer (Read more: School Laws of Lower Saxony, http://www.schure.de/nschg/nschg/nschg43.htm (in German)). Any pupil has to do nine (9) years in general education (primary and first part of secondary education) and three more years (second part of secondary education) either in vocational training (Berufsschule) or in general education (Gymnasium, aiming for the Abitur, German equivalent of A-Levels). Ulsterman 13:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The confusion may come about because school attendance may be only one day a week. For instance an apprentice hairdresser or car mechanic may spend one day a week in formal education, and the rest of the week doing "vocational training" at a place of work. Or there will be a block of several weeks at the Berufsschule and a much larger block at the normal place of work. --Boson 16:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factual error in "Education" section: 

message: The article says, that men are forced into military service, but I think it's also important to state there, that anyone can effectivly chose to do military or a civil serivce. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.64.122.11 (talk) 16:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Effectively, yes, officially, no ;) --80.137.220.199 09:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military Service 

message: The EU map showing, on this page, Germany highlighted, is now in use on every single EU page apart from, you've guessed it - the United Kingdom! It was there, but User:TharkunColl persists in removing it, even breaking 3RR. I would be grateful if editors interested in the EU pages could go along and fix it as I will myself be in breach if I do again. Thanks for any help! MarkThomas 19:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  EU map 

message: What the hell is it? You guys just published pics of the south. Where are pics of the north and central Germany? I hope you people change it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.42.218.3 (talk) 23:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures (Only South) 

message: this section focus (in a non that neutral way) on the US-German relation, forgot the world did not actually resolved around the US? Cliché Online 18:25, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not if the U.S. and this U.S. website have anything to say about it.
-G —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.117.157.7 (talk) 18:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: foreign relation or relation with the us??

message: Please, link Sarland under post-WW2 map to Saar (protectorate). --83.131.195.107 06:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saarland link 

message: Germany is described as both a unified State, and a Federal State. This is a major contradiction. If Germany indeed is a Federal government with 16 States, then it - like the USA - is a Federal Union where the States have governments of their own, a significant measure of self-government, and an internal identity that is only shaped by Berlin to a limited degree. Yes, they have all given up a measure of their sovereignty, but they are sovereign states none the less. - SSG Cornelius Seon (Retired) 15:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a federal state, like the US. Signaturebrendel 01:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

text: "Unified nation state" is used here not in the sense of a unitary state but in the sense of a single sovereign state (in international relations) resulting from a process of unification among states that previously formed only a confederation of states or were completely independent of each other. --Boson 07:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FEDERAL GERMANY 

message: Germany does not have any national motto. The slogan Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit is only the anthem. Any officials motto does not exist.84.142.84.61 00:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't quite know how "national motto" is defined, but the explanation given at List of state mottos fits for "Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit", as that is used on coins (previously, on 5 DM, now on 2 € coins). Kusma (討論) 12:06, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It isn't a official national motto. It is just like the national motto of Poland Bóg, Honor, Ojczyzna. It is a national motto in Poland and you can see it in official ceremonial occasion on banners (look for example a ceremony 2005), but in the constitution is nothing about a national motto. Equally in Germanys constitution is nothing about a national motto.--84.142.84.61 15:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither does the US constitution mention a motto. Lars T. 21:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motto 

message: The German Workers Party, which later changed its name to National Socialist German Workers' Party, was founded on January 5, 1919, not in September of the same year (see Wikipedia's History of Germany).
No reason was given for the date change. I therefore reverted the change. Nellov5 15:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weimar Republic 

message: That, according to "The Guardian", German residents "spend a significant part of the year living in Spain" is no proof that an increasing number of Germans are actually emigrating to that particular country. Nellov5 08:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The page talks about "Extranjeros", which means foreigners - not (necessarily) immigrants. Lars T. 17:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can download more extensive reports here . Latest numbers from 2005 show Spain is now the biggest target in south Europe (if you exclude Austria and Switzerland from that ;-), beating France by one person - unlike the year before. BTW, more Germans move to the UK than to Spain Lars T. 17:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: The link timed out. Here is one that should work: . The downloads are free. BTW, this is the original site I got the link from:   Lars T. 23:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  German immigration to Spain 

message: The other two most popular sports in Germany are marksmanship and tennis represented by the German Marksmen’s Federation and the German Tennis Federation respectively, both including more than a million members.
I'd like to mention that this needs some comments. Marksmanship is not really a popular sport in Germany but a folkloristic thing. Nearly every small village (not the larger towns) has a "Schützenverein" a marksmen club. That means once a year most male members of the community come together to shoot at a wooden bird high on a pole. Mostly with a gun fixed to a base. When the last bit of the bird comes down (after seveal hours), the man that had the last shoot is "Schützenkönig" King of marksmen for one year. That means he has to pay the beaverages for the hole community to party all night and get drunk. Biggest and most important party of the small village year. Yes, one of our more ridiculus traditions. You can not call this a sport. It dates back (I'm not shure about this) to the time after Napoleon and was supposed to show, that the population can defend itselfe an to keep the people in training. No one cares about that military aspects anymore today. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.63.114.124 (talk) 23:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: in my home region (East Saxony) no one even cares for marksmanship and there are few "Schützenvereine".84.181.109.180 07:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culture/Sports 

message: I see this article has just been flagged "Expand". If I recall correctly, it was condensed in the course of the Featured Article process and the details transferred to the subsidiary articles. What should be added to this article?--Boson 07:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the expand tag. It was in the "History" section, which is certainly not in need of expansion. It still contains unnecessary details; people should only add to the subarticles. Kusma (討論) 07:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expand? 

message: Are you sure it is  and not ? -- 84.159.109.239 19:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the last character of your rendering is displayed correctly by my browser, but the final consonant is, in my opinion, a voiceless alveolar plosive when the word is spoken alone. The [d] currently shown in the article (2007-02-23) is incorrect, in my opinion, though there might be regional differences, and the last consonant would vary when singing (possibly being replaced by something like a glottal stop when chanting). --Boson 20:15, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  IPA Spelling of 'Deutschland' 

message: World War II and the Nazi genocide were responsible for about 35 million dead in Europe, with nearly 30 million of these in Poland and the Soviet Union alone.
That leaves a margin of five million deaths in all the other European countries. But even Germany alone has 7.5 million deaths according to World War II casualties, the "source" that was used. And what's everybody's impression after reading the above quote regarding the numbers of deaths in Poland? 17m dead or something like that? According to the wiki article again, it's 2.6m when not counting Jewish victims, much less than Indonesia and much much less than China. User:Serafin is evading his block to indulge in Polish advocacy, as so many times before. By not undoing these edits outright or even make concessions, one would indirectly support and encourage further block evasions on his part. In the German wikipedia, he mainly (or even only) tried to replace "Silesian" with "Polish" against consensus, soon got blocked indefinitely, accused everybody who opposed him as a Nazi (see User:Contra Nazi's talk page for Serafin's "truth"), but in the end got nowhere and with his current behaviour he should not get anywhere here, either. Sciurinæ 14:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem, the "undo" link on a differences page works quite well ;-) Lars T. 22:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serafin sentence 

message: This may be controversial, but I have reverted NOON'S additions about the Holocaust. The details he provides are important, but should be in the sub-articles ("History of Germany", "The Holocaust" etc.), IMO. The history part of this article is meant as an overview of German history, not as a detailed description. One moderator stated that this part shouldn't be expanded any further. If the moderators find my revision to be against the rules, please undo my changes. 
I have also removed the disputed sentence about Poland and the Soviet Union. 
Nellov5 15:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Subjugation alone doesn't necessarily kill. It's the "systematic extermination performed on an industrial scale" in extermination camps etc., which made the killing so effective. IMHO, that's the minimum that should be written in the Holocaust section. The total death toll (around 40 million) may be mentioned in the WWII paragraph and is not part of the Holocaust as such. Noon 00:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

text: The 125KB article of The Holocaust is summarized in a paragraph of 3 sentences. It is still a very rough overview for a major genocide made by the Third Reich. If you wish to shorten the history section, please check other portions. Don't revert it back to an inaccurate and vague version. Thanks, Noon 01:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, how many country pages mention genocides at all? Lars T. 06:29, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Concur. Content issues aside, there really shouldn't be any expansion of the history section for this article - it will just make any future summarizing more difficult. Besides, try developing the related articles - this article should link to them with the shortest summary possible. Even that should be done in a global summary of the topic concerned (in this case, history). Baristarim 10:29, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

text: We don't need details of the geographical location of the deaths here. If necessary, refer (perhaps in a footnote) to other articles (Holocaust, History of Germany, World War II casualties, etc.) Boson 22:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Third Reich 

message: "Military Service is compulsory for men at the age of 18 and conscripts serve nine-month tours of duty"
I'm 99% sure this isn't true, there is a 'social' option which involves various community based work e.g. working with the elderly etc.
Investigation needed!
:Good point, that somehow got lost. Fixed. Lars T. 23:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compulsory military service 

message: where is it??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.63.98.189 (talk) 07:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note 14