Talk:Paul von Hindenburg

message: change Machtergreifung to "rise of power". Makes it easier for people to understand without having to click on the link. R34p3r2006 (talk) 11:21, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Machtergreifung

message: As a historic interested German I can say you, that Hindenburg has two very difficult faces in the German history. The first one is the Hero who saved Eastern Germany from the russian hordes in the first world war, and democratic elected president. Although he was monarchist and disliked the Weimar republic, he respected the constitution and did nothing prohibitted. The other face is that he appointed Hitler for Reichskanzler. But you have to know that he was very senile and influenced by people like his son. Hindenburg himself, the aristocratic General Field Marshal of his Majesty the Emperor and King of Prussia, disliked Hitler, the "bohemian private" really. When Hitler wished to be appointed, Hindenburg said "He wants to be chancellor? He might be minister of postal service. Then he is able to lick me from behind, like on the post marks" (Hindenburg was builded up on these as head of state). On the other side he ruled with decrees and signed the decrees from Hitler. So he is a controversy discussed person in the German history.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.16.247.81 (talk) 14:44, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The two faces of Hindenburg 

message: The left-justified image with the caption "Hindenburg at a radio microphone, January 1932" appears to be partially obscured by the text from a block quote. Does anyone else have this formatting issue? Sire TRM (talk) 20:08, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting: Left justified image 

message: I added to the entry the historical correspondence between Hindenburg and Hitler concerning the threatment of Jewish World War I veterans and its interesting to see how Hindenburg seems not to have held anti-semitic feelings, despite the fact that he didnt opposed most anti-Jewish Nazi legislation. This is the source I used: . Hindenburg shows no hostility to the Jews: "Recently, a whole series of cases has been reported to me in which judges, lawyers, and officials of the Judiciary who are disabled war veterans and whose record in office is flawless, have been forcibly sent on leave, and are later to be dismissed for the sole reason that they are of Jewish descent./ It is quite intolerable for me personally...that Jewish officials who were disabled in the war should suffer such treatment, [especially] as, with the express approval of the government, I addressed a Proclamation to the German people on the day of the national uprising, March 21, in which I bowed in reverence before the dead of the war and remembered in gratitude the bereaved families of the war dead, the disabled, and my old comrades at the front. I am certain, Mr. Chancellor, that you share this human feeling, and request you, most cordially and urgently, to look into this matter yourself, and to see to it that there is some uniform arrangement for all branches of the public service in Germany. As far as my own feelings are concerned, officials, judges, teachers and lawyers who are war invalids, fought at the front, are sons of war dead, or themselves lost sons in the war should remain in their positions unless an individual case gives reason for different treatment. If they were worthy of fighting for Germany and bleeding for Germany, then they must also be considered worthy of continuing to serve the Fatherland in their professions...." Mistico (talk) 16:39, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Mistico, with all due respect I feel that you have misunderstood Hindenburg's view of Jews. It is quite correct that Hindenburg was against anti-Semitic laws being applied to war veterans, but it was only Jewish war veterans that concerned him. Hindenburg's views of the Jews was that it was wrong to discriminate against the "patriotic Jews" who fought for the Fatherland in the World War, but it was quite acceptable to discriminate against the presumably unpatriotic Jews who did not fight in the war. Hindenburg did speak out against attempts to discriminate against Jewish war veterans, but he did not object to signing in anti-Semitic laws in general, and furthermore, the only reason why this situation existed was because it was Hindenburg who appointed Hitler chancellor in the first place. The fact that Hindenburg spoke out against attempts to discriminate against Jewish veterans does not absolve him of his responsibility for Nazi Germany.--A.S. Brown (talk) 20:19, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Hindenburg Views of the Jews

message: The note of congratulations Hindenburg supposedly sent was written by the Nazis. Hindenburg was senile and dying of cancer by then. (79.67.118.232 (talk) 12:52, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Night of the Long Knives 

message: Given the controversial role this man played, the article needs more refs. It would also be nice if someone could add a sourced explanation why someone like Hindenburg, a die-hard monarchist,  in 1925 accepted the role of head of state of a republic he pretty much despised. I deleted some of the unsourced claims on Groener which contradicted sourced content on his own page and elsewhere. There were also two different spellings of Meißner/Meissner. I opted for Meißner.Drow69 (talk) 11:36, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs more refs 

message: "he considered Hindenburg a man, who through lacking imagination and initiative would faithfully carry out his plans". I think, this is a totally wrong characterization. Helmuth von Moltke, who let the Prussian Army in the wars against Austria and France, characterized his young staff officer totally different: "Ein Mann von kolossalem Selbstvertrauen, ich habe aber festgestellt, dass alles was er tut Hand und Fuß hat und lasse ihn deshalb gewähren". Moltkes successors Graf von Waldersee and Graf von Schlieffen characterized him always with words like "herausragend fähig" and "überragend" in their army internal statements. In 1904 Hindenburg was Commander of the 4.th Army-Corps and had a clash with the Kaiser at a maneuvre, when he rebuked the Kaisers protegee Helmuth von Moltke the youger, who was one of his division commanders. Everyone knew, that the younger Molke had no talent, but the Kaiser was fascinated of him, or better of his name and made him successor of Schlieffen, instead of Hindenburg. Hindenburg was at this time widely accepted as the most gifted officer of the German Army. But it is true, that later as Chef der Heeresleitung he let Ludendorff do what he want and did not intervene, even when Ludendorff made bad mistakes, like in the Michaelsschlacht in March 1918.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.8.154.117 (talk) 14:45, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong characterization 

message: "He played the key role in the Nazi "Seizure of Power" in January 1933 by appointing Hitler chancellor of a "Government of National Concentration", even though the Nazis were a plurality in cabinet." 
I would rephrase this as "He, inadvertently, played the key role in the Nazi "Seizure of Power" in January 1933 by appointing Hitler chancellor of a "Government of National Concentration", even though the Nazis were a plurality in cabinet."
SecretName101 (talk) 22:39, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  wording 

message: Currently, the article contains this:
The right formed a committee to block adoption, they started by intensively lobbying Hindenburg, using such powerful voices as Turpitz. 
I'm not expert enough to be sure; but I suppose that is a misspelling (Alfred von Tirpitz). If someone can confirm this, please do the edit. Oaklandguy (talk) 19:05, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small editing point: Does "Turpitz" mean Tirpitz? 

message: While reading Paul von Hindenburg's page, I've noticed there has been an considerable amount of material added regarding his career as a commander in World War I. First off, I'd like to mention there's a lot of good stuff here. Given how much it's universally accepted that Hindenburg formed a virtual military dictatorship in Germany during World War I, it's nice to see someone flesh out Hindenburg's role in shaping his country's policies and what impact his decisions had on the battlefield. With that being said, I've noticed there are many times where the article devolves into a chronological history of World War I without giving any mention of Hindenburg's role in such events (assuming he even had a role). 
This problem starts getting noticeable from [World War I, Subection 1916] onwards. The introduction, "The Resurgent Russians" discusses at length Russian preparations leading to the Brusilov Offensive and how it caught the Central Powers off guard. However, it contains no mention whatsoever of Hindenburg let alone whether any of his decisions had anything to do with the Russians' initial success. Similarly, the article provides detailed descriptions of Germany's 1916 Romanian campaign, "Hindenburg Program",  adoption of unrestricted submarine warfare, and 1918 offensives while mentioning only once or twice how Hindenburg had any role in them. While I believe there's a place for material exploring Hindenburg's personal impact on German military planning and other developments during World War I, I think it exceeds this page's scope to include detailed summaries of events that simply happened to occur under his command. 
Just to be clear, it is not my opinion that these contributions have no merit whatsoever. Clearly, someone has put a lot of time and effort in researching this material and uploading it to educate others about World War I. I just don't think it has a place in a biographical article devoted to the life and career of Paul von Hindenburg. As a compromise, I wanted to suggest moving it to a separate page. Any thoughts? Emiya1980 (talk) 23:54, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hindenburg's Role in World War I 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Paul von Hindenburg. 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/20071012211636/http://1911encyclopedia.org/Paul_Von_Hindenburg to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Paul_Von_Hindenburg
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) 01:54, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Although this section is correctly titled, it as good as states in its text that there were two presidential elections in 1925: "By law there had to be another election", and later "The second election.." Perhaps the initial contributor of this section was misled by the replacement, between the election's two rounds, of Karl Jarres as a candidate by Hindenburg.
I strongly suggest the section be rewritten. If no-one else has a go by the end of this week, I may attempt the job myself. Harfarhs (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  '1925 election' section 

message: On what date in 1932 did Paul von Hindenburg's second term as Realm President begin? --2001:999:21:1A8B:1C1B:6666:4B40:4C75 (talk) 13:52, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: 1932 German presidential election suggests 10 April? That was at least when the second round took place. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:08, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No, no. The second round of the German presidential election 1925 took place on 26 April, but von Hindenburg's first term officially began 12 May. The second round of the German presidential election 1932 took place on 10 April, but on what date von Hindenburg's second term officially did begin? --2001:999:21:1A8B:1C1B:6666:4B40:4C75 (talk) 16:54, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I had assumed it was that same day, 10 April, as he was the incumbent and his first seven year term was not due to expire until 24 April. Only three days later, on 13 April, he passed an emergency decree through Article 48 ordering the SA, SS and all auxiliary forces of the Nazi Party dissolved immediately. So surely his second term had already officially begun by then? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it possible, that von Hindenburg's first seven year term was due to expire on 11 May or 12 May, when seven years came exactly fullfilled and the second term began on 12 May or 13 May 1932? --2001:999:21:1A8B:1C1B:6666:4B40:4C75 (talk) 18:11, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I guess that's possible. Except that would mean his emergency decree was passed before he officially took office. If the constitution allowed for a few weeks to elapse, between election and official term start, in 1925, one might expect the same to apply in 1932? I really don't know and have been unable to find anything definite online. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: He will have been in office even before he took the oath of office a second time. Let me see if I can find a source... Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:25, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

text: Correction: His term ended on 5 May 1932, exactly seven years after the result of the 1925 election was officially announced. Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:37, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Tnanks. The OP wanted to know the date that his second term as President began. Does this mean it was 6 May? Is there a source we could quote? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:43, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I am still searching. The beginning of the term must then have been the date on which the result of the 1932 election was announced. I have not yet found when that was. Also, the election laws do not specify this, so apparently, there seems to be no actual regulation on this... which is weird. Zwerg Nase (talk) 08:52, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: "His term ended on 5 May 1932, exactly seven years after the result of the 1925 election was officially announced." Well, but notice that von Hindenburg's first term began on 12 May 1925. --2001:999:71:7F45:1CB0:6142:7D57:C50C (talk) 09:30, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Many thanks. I wonder do you have a source for 12 May? Exactly what happened in those seven days between the result announcement and the term staring? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:38, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

text: Many thanks. The result was announced on 5 May 1925? But his term started on 12 May 1915, seven days later? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:21, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is that he did not start his term until his inauguration, which wasn't until the 12th, taking place at the Reichstag. The source above states that Walter Simons, President of the Reichsgericht acted as President in the time between Ebert's death and the start of Hindenburg's term. Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  On what date? 

message: It is written in the article:
"Hindenburg did this to satisfy Hitler's demands that he should play a part in the Weimar government, for Hitler was the leader of the Nazi party, which had won a plurality in the November 1932 elections."
This suggests the NSDAP won plurality in the Nov 1932 election, but did actually lose plurality. Furthermore the NSDAP already had won a plurality in the Jul 1932 election.
91.62.242.31 (talk) 02:45, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nov 1932 election, NSDAP; plurality won or lost? 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Paul von Hindenburg (1914) von Nicola Perscheid.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for October 2, 2021. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2021-10-02. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:26, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD 

message: I don't think it's necessary to have Hindenburg's full name at the beginning of the early life section, since it is already at the beginning of the article. Any thoughts? Professor Penguino (talk) 02:05, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Early life" section 

message: A suggestion has been made by a contemporary. This man was a front line British officer in the Great War, later to becomme a well known writer. He had a great appetite for historical detail, and dug up the following bit of information for his first book, a story that was never published until recently. I have not seen this info on Hindenburg anywhere else. Can it be verified?
Two German officers are discussing Hindenburg and the victory at Tannenberg:
“His rise has been very sudden, has it not?”
Von Stolke nodded. “Yes, we all thought him mad before the war. He could think of nothing else but the Masurian lakes, and how they could be used to trap an enemy army. He was considered the biggest bore in the military academy at home… [discussion of Hindenburg’s retirement] … [the Kaiser] did not hesitate to recall [Hindenburg] to command when Von Francois had been defeated and the Russians were invading Prussia. He was the one man for the command. The marshes and forests had been his life study and, when he was retired, he spent his whole life mapping out these swamps. It became an obsession with him - so much so that we used to call him Swampy Hindenburg, and his nickname among the rooms was ‘Papa Cold Bath’, because he kept them maneuvering for hours at a stretch, wading through a couple of feet of water. But he proved his theory right at Tannenberg…”
-‘Julie’s Lovers’, by Dennis Wheatley (written 1917-1918, first published 2022) 
Further info at denniswheatley.info
I had never heard any reason given for Hindenburg’s recall other than that an aristocrat was wanted to balance the commoner Ludendorff. And there were other men, why him, with no special connections at court?
If any of this can be verified, it would make a good addition to the article. 2A00:23C7:E287:1901:749D:CDA8:504C:141E (talk) 10:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Why was he recalled to duty in 1914?

message: @Neveselbert I'm wondering why you removed the reference to field marshal from the short description. He's at least as well, if not more, known for his military than his political career. GHStPaulMN (talk) 21:03, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Point taken, I've restored the previous description. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 08:43, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks GHStPaulMN (talk) 12:04, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Short description 

message: No reliable source can be found for this from what I can find. This fact was possibly invented by the person who wrote Katharina von Bora's Wikipedia article from a possibly self-published source. Isz Chepewéssin (talk) 03:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Descended from Martin Luther & Katharina von Bora?