Talk:Adolf Hitler/Archive 32

message: William Patrick Hitler is listed as "nephew," but shouldn't that be "half-nephew" since there was a separate marriage involved? 206.156.242.36 21:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Family

message: One Haham hanuka seems fond of inserting a link to the "Hitler Historical Museum." I've decided my contribution to Wikipedia is mostly going to be removing dubious links, of which that is one. It is an anonymous source, with no information as to who stands behind it given directly, although its links tend to be to neo-Nazi sites. Its content is inferior to all sorts of other sites on Adolf Hitler. It meets none of the standards for a reliable source. So I intend to remove it whenever Haham hanuka manages to reinsert it, and would ask others who watch the article to cooperate in the endeavor. Bytwerk 19:23, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally agree with you, Bytwerk. Haham Hanuka is a known PoV pusher and tried in the past more than once to put this Neo-Nazi link, and was reverted (example). According to his pattern of behaviour, he waits a while, and tries again. I'll remove this dubious link altogether as per Bytwerk reasons. Noon 22:18, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (The link was removed already). Noon 22:23, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now reported HH for 3RR. He can't say he was not warned, as he marked the editsummary of the 4th revert acknowledging the fact of his violation. Just a reminder to everyone else - even given HH's history don't treat it as vandalizm - the 3RR rule applies to everyone in this case. And with another editwar going on today it could be easy to loose count. Agathoclea 23:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious Links 

message: Can we somehow address his moustache? It it is very unusual, even in his time. A lot of documentaries I have seen with people who remember his takeover usually comment on how comical it made him look. The only other person I have ever seen that had a moustache like his were comedians like Oliver Hardy and Charlie Chaplin. The word moustache dosn't even appear once in the article. Even a sentence or two addressing it might be intresting.
--The_stuart 20:27, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: His Moustache

message: Hi, I'm not sure I understand the reasoning behind removing the semi protection from one of the most heavily vandalized pages. Just look at the page history. So much noise is generated by the vandals and the reverts, that it's extremely difficult to track good-faith edits and legitimate changes over a longer period.
-- nyenyec ☎ 23:14, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was wondering that myself. But there are plenty of people watching the page for vandalizm - if you had not reverted I would have within another 10 seconds. Sadly for this case I believe that wikipedia policy forbits longterm protection. Agathoclea 23:29, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's the point of removing the semi-protection? 

message: The external link to link removed Hitler Historical Museum was removed by User:Bytwerk without giving a reason, why should we avoid this link? --Haham hanuka 08:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was plenty of reason given by a number of editors. Agathoclea 08:26, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you point to those editors' reasons? I visited the site  - feeble, but the information contained there doesn't seem inaccurate, although it is rather pointedly incomplete eg. the one-para biogs of Hitler's friends and compatriots. And the links section doesn't appear overtly to connect with neo-Nazi sites (definition needed). Inclusion on WP of external links ought to depend on factual content: should a site be excluded for stating some of the facts - eg. translations of Hitler's speeches etc - while failing to refer to, say, the findings of the international tribunals at Nuremberg?--shtove 21:13, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anonymous sources are not exceptable sources Agathoclea 22:14, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Just to summarize, the site is anonymous (the registered owner is "united. thought"). It provides no information as to who is behind it. Its mailing address is a strip mall in Herndon, Virginia. It is a sloppy site, with a variety of errors (typographical and otherwise). It claims to be unbiased, but most of its links led to neo-Nazi sites. There is no indication that the person behind the site knows German. No sources for any of the information provided are given. And there are much more reliable sites on the Internet that provide the same information. Bytwerk 12:52, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition it was put AT THE TOP OF ALL LINKS by a user who makes a lot of POV edits and is regularly blocked from using Wikipedia for breaking our rules  as well as permanently banned from using the system in his mother tongue. gidonb 12:58, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

text: That has not been done, as the edits in question where in the article. Saying that Link-spam should also be removed from talkspace. In this case though I would leave it for a little longer as there is still some (not much) debate about the content of the site and its relevance. That will give us also the time to find out the norms involved and come to an agreement here. Anyway I know that people have been "asked" to remove certain links from their User-Talk-page with a similar reasoning. Agathoclea 16:03, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

text: There have been allegations of Searchenginefraud about this particular user. I left that particular link a little longer to give everyone here the opportunity to do a double check themselves. I have now removed it and people can check it in the history of this and the article page if they wish to. It will just be hidden from google. Agathoclea 17:04, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hitler Historical Museum 

message: I can find no reference on the source (Haiden, 1936, 1937) and feel highly disconcerted about this. Are you sure this is not a made-up source? No major book on Hitler lists it!
Janrpeters 00:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is probably Konrad Heiden. Bytwerk 00:08, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But then there should be a correct reference added into the article! Janrpeters
Janrpeters 03:27, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Source (Haiden, 1936, 1937)

message: Technically the proper way to write it is less than ten --> in letters, more than ten in numbers like 12. Someone edit the introduction to reflect this change 168.253.20.179 00:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Stop writing numbers in letters when the numbers are greater than 10

message: Ok, not only is he in :Category:Fascism, when there is a:Category:Nazism as a subcategory, but he doesn't even belong there, as there is in 14 goddamn subcategories of Nazism! What is it with editors that they feel the need to make categories fall into incoherence?! If you feel the crushing need to make categories pointless, at least get used to the habit of writing family name first in brackets (that is: |Hitler, Adolf]])! Otherwise, he will end up under A for Adolf, for those of you who have not yet figured out that computers can't automotaically figure themthings out. You have locked the page, so I can't modify it: when you do modify it, could you please watch out for any geniuses that feel I still haven't made a point? Prette please? Dahn 06:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is only semiprotected, so you should be able to do something. I would support a category-cleanup anyhow, as there is an awful lot there that is duplicated. A lot of people don't understand that normally there is no need to have the main cat mentioned when there is a subcat. Agathoclea 07:15, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just been looking through the categories and there is a larger problem there. If you go back through Nazi Leaders you will find a lot of categories repeated. Agathoclea 10:01, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Category and name

message: The article states In Mein Kampf Hitler describes his father as an "irascible tyrant," Where does  it say this? Please give the page number. Drogo Underburrow 07:55, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I searched three online versions of Mein Kampf with the search text feature in Mozilla Firefox, and a search form, but could find no word, "irascible." Tyrant came up only once, and then he was speaking of Jews. So I'll remove that part. Эйрон Кинни (t) 02:01, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you. Hitlers father actually was an "irascible tyrant," but there was no way that Hitler was going to say that about his own father in Mein Kampf, for political reasons having to do with German culture in regards to the family at the time. Having read Mein Kampf, I knew that some editor had invented this "fact", but rather than take it out of this controversial article, I prefer letting someone else do it, and thank you for it. Drogo Underburrow 02:18, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

text: In Mein Kampf Hitler describes his father as an "irascible tyrant," although there is little indication that Alois Hitler treated his son more strictly than was usual for that time and place.
As this is simply false. Hitler wrote no such thing in Mein Kampf, and the second part is unsourced POV of the editor. -- Drogo Underburrow 05:15, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Irascible tyrant?

message: In the paragraphs about World War One there is the sentences: "Meanwhile he was treated by a military physician and specialist in psychiatry who reportedly diagnosed the corporal as "incompetent to command people" and "dangerously psychotic." His commander at the time said, "I will never promote this hysteric!" (cited from Haiden, 1937) However, historian Sebastian Haffner, referring to Hitler's experience at the front, suggests he did have at least some understanding of the military."
What is Haiden, and where are these supposed quotes coming from? Volksgeist 07:33, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be Konrad Heiden. I've changed it. Bytwerk 11:58, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've probably missed it; however, where is it cited that he said these things? I see nothing on the article itself about where those quotes came from just (Heiden 1937). The parenthetical citations don't in a bibliographical form at the bottom of the article, either. Volksgeist 12:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps someone will chase down the appropriate bibliographic data, which should be easier now that the name is right? Bytwerk 13:53, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Should it even be included if there is no source of information for the statements? Volksgeist 08:41, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really - but I think people have allowed time to chase the source. Agathoclea 08:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Some Journalists do write under pseudonyms especially if they want to keep different careers seperate. Agathoclea 11:44, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What is Haiden?