Talk:Reichstag building

message: The body says that the construction on the Reichtag didn't start until "well after 1871".  However, the caption on the first image claims to be of the Reichtag in about 1870.  Clearly one of these is wrong...
--69.245.158.240 23:35, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Clarified that. djmutex 15:07, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: Should mention of their use of the Reichstag for their Art Projects be mentioned? I think it is an interesting fact.
I also think it should be added.
 BonsMans (talk) 18:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Cristo & Jean Claude

message: I've read an article on the Reichstag and noticed that some wikipedian wrote a passage on the red flag saying it was staged and stuff. I checked with modern Russian sources and they say that the daytime attack on the Reichsag began on April 30, 1945. Indeed, a couple of them say that the attack was unsuccessful, however, most of them say that it did happen and soldiers V.Provotorov and G.Bulatov attached the flag to the pediment at 2:25PM on April 30. Bulatov's awarding ceremony has been documented (order No.0121/н from June 8, 1945). The sources then say that soldiers M.A.Yegorov and M.V.Kantariya placed the flag on the cupola of the Reichstag at 9:50PM on April 30 (looks like a few hours later). Some sources say that by early morning of May 1, the flag had already been there. I just wanted to know your opinion on all of this. KNewman 15:08, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
Just removed the name of Mikhail Petrowitsch Minin, seems as if this is unclear who raised the flag.  says there a 95 different versions and  mentions various some soldiers that claim it was them. -guety is talking english bad 22:37, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It was always my impression that the flag planting was a bit like the Iwo Jima photo- a later posed staging of an actual event. It is definitely unclear who exactly lifted the flag however. On another note- During the Battle of Berlin in 1945, it became the central target for the Red Army for reasons not entirely clear, since it served no political, military, or strategic purpose at all. This is a strange sentence. I would have thought the propaganda and symbolic value of capturing the enemy parliament building (whether in use or not) would be obvious. I will alter this passage, unless someone can explain it. Badgerpatrol 03:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your impression of the Iwo flag raising is about 180 degrees off base.  The second flag raising (the one Joe Rosenthall captured on film) was anything but "staged".  Of the six in the second flag raising - five Marines and a navy corpsman, three of the Marines died before that "staged event" ended.  While there is some truth to the phrase "only the winners write history", remember that only the whiners rewrite it.
 says Meliton Kantaria and Mikhail Yegorov were the ones in the famous Khaldei photo. No general consensus on who first raised the flag, but confirmation on the people in the photo. Note: There were many raisings of the flag, the first was at night. The photo is just a re-raising, like Iwo Jima. In other words, the photo was not the original flag raising.
Also, note, literally speaking, the flag in the photo was not the Flag of the Soviet Union, it was the Victory Banner. -The Red Baron 22:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Soviet flag over Reichstag

message: Sanssouci is currently up for peer review here. If anyone has any comments to make to improve it, I would be very grateful. Trebor27trebor 18:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sanssouci

message: I am told this means "For the German People" not "To the German People" as this article states. Adam 00:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The German word Dem is one the words for the, specifically for masculine and neuter nouns in the dative case.  This basically means when the word is an indirect object.  When standing alone, it can be interpereted as to/for (whatever), so either translation is correct. --Phantom784 01:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Phantom784 is right, it can mean both "to" or "for". But "(literally, 'The German people')" as it also was in the article, is wrong - I'll delete that. --FAThomssen (talk) 21:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I think that "To the German People" is better. In German, one would rather write "Für das deutsche Volk" if "For the German People" were intended, so I think we can remove the "for" translation. Gestumblindi (talk) 23:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that. "To the German People" is better in my opinion because no matter which verb you think "DEM" belongs to, you'd always translate it to "TO" ("gewidmet dem"/"dedicated to", "gegeben dem"/"given to" etc.) --91.21.114.88 (talk) 14:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

text: DEM DEUTSCHEN VOLKE is DAS DEUTSCHE VOLK in the dative case (and if you're interested, it would be DES DEUTSCHEN VOLKES in the genitive case). The dative case by itself indicates the idea of motion towards, and is customarily used for dedications at monuments and suchlike (another example is DEN TOTEN DES DEUTSCHEN HEERES, seen at a war memorial in Koblenz-Ehrenbreitstein, where "den Toten" is "die Toten" in the dative case). So I would say that "to", in context, is a proper translation, since that is customarily used for dedications at monuments and suchlike in English. Kelisi (talk) 18:15, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: DEM DEUTSCHEN VOLKE

message: Acurate representation of the Reichstag? Dfrg.msc 06:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similarities?  

message: Hello everyone I would like to know if the animated pic on right is that of the Reichstag.  Legaleagle86 03:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, this got mixed up with the similar named Reichsparteitag and shows the Nazi party rally grounds in Nuremberg. The blast clip was already mentioned in the article, I added it. -- Matthead discuß!     O       15:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this pic of Reichstag 

message: In front of the Reichstag, to the left of centre as you look at it are three flagpoles. Two of them have the German and European flags, but the one in the middle doesn't have one. You can see photographic evidence of this in :Image:Reichstag_pano.jpg. Is a third flag ever flown, and if so, what is it? If not, why are there three poles? 79.68.216.39 (talk) 16:02, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In order to honour important guests (ministers, heads of government, heads of state) from another country, their national flag is flown between the European and German flags. See this example (<---That link doesn't work) for an Tanzanian visitor to the Federal Chancellery. -- megA (talk) 18:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Flagpoles

message: This video: [] has calling of Redarmy's veterans about the tooking of Reichstag in 1945.Agre22 (talk) 03:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Reichstag in 1945

message: The articles makes no mention of Yevgeny Khaldei's photo now. The text from Censorship of images in the Soviet Union#Flag on the Reichstag would fit quite well. Stu ’Bout ye! 13:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Red Army photo

message: Made a minor edit to the header of the article to remove the phrase "traitors" and instead placed "Opponents of the Nazi Party"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DRCarroll (talk • contribs) 07:38, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the building 

message: When the Cold War emerged, the building was physically within West Berlin, but only a few metres from the border of East Berlin, which ran around the back of the building and in 1961 was closed by the Berlin Wall.
How was it "closed" by the Berlin wall ? To do this the wall would have had to encroach on western territory which it didnt. 86.112.80.224 (talk) 10:49, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlin Wall 

message: Referring to the following line:
[3] The Reichstag is now the second most visited attraction in Berlin
When I click the hyperlink embedded in this text I am taken here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_Germany#Landmarks
That page says the Reichstag is the second most visited landmark in all of Germany...  not just Berlin.
This seems to be an inconsistency.
Does anyone know which "claim" is correct?
Euro888 (talk) 12:13, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency between quote and linked reference 

message: I've expanded the Reichstag disambiguation page to include all uses of the word Reichstag for buildings and parliamentary bodies. That way the multiple mastheads and duplicate references in this article on what Reichstag means can be shortened. New articles have been also created for Reichstag (North German Confederation) and Reichstag (Nazi Germany), so I modified a few wikilinks here and there.
---
Ultracobalt (talk) 14:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup formatting 

message: Since we have a photo of the Soviet graffiti, I added a translation of the following from German Wiki:
:Respekt vor der historischen Gebäudesubstanz war eine der Forderungen, die an die Architekten gestellt worden waren. Spuren der Geschichte sollten auch nach dem Umbau sichtbar bleiben. Dazu gehören auch Graffiti sowjetischer Soldaten in kyrillischer Schrift aus den Maitagen 1945, die nach der Eroberung Berlins angebracht wurden ("Hitler kaputt," "Kaukasus-Berlin"). Texte mit rassistischen oder sexistischen Aussagen wurden in Abstimmung mit russischen Diplomaten entfernt, die Übrigen werden im umgebauten Reichstag gezeigt.
There's nothing in this piece about the controversial nature of the Reichstag's mishmash of architectural styles. The German Wiki article quotes Kaiser Wilhelm II, not noted for his tact, as describing the building as "the pinnacle of tastelessness" and "a wholly unsuccessful creation" (Gipfel der Geschmacklosigkeit" und "völlig verunglückte Schöpfung"). However, Wilhelm was known for melodramatic and ill-considered pronouncements, and I don't think he's a good source. Someone with more knowledge of this architectural topic could add a paragraph. I think it would be worth doing since the building is such a widely known and much-visited site.
More pics would help, particularly one from the Cold War period when the building, partially restored, was open to the public. I went through it in 1971 and found it very interesting. At that time, no Soviet graffiti were in sight.
Sca (talk) 15:49, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Graffiti, architecture

message: Someone should add a sub section about how the building runs on bio fuel and stores excess heat in water reservoirs to heat the building at night
"The building provides a model for sustainability by burning renewable bio-fuel - refined vegetable oil − in a cogenerator to produce electricity: a system that is far cleaner than burning fossil fuels. The result is a 94 per cent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.
Surplus heat is stored as hot water in an aquifer deep below ground and can be pumped up to heat the building or to drive an absorption cooling plant to produce chilled water. Significantly, the building's energy requirements are modest enough to allow it to produce more energy than it consumes and to perform as a mini power station in the new government quarter."
from the projects official page on Fosters website linked below see:- [http://www.fosterandpartners.com/projects/reichstag-new-german-parliament/ this Vivosims (talk) 02:19, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sustainable redesign by Foster 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Reichstag 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/20150502022352/http://www.berlin.de/orte/sehenswuerdigkeiten/reichstag/index.en.php to http://www.berlin.de/orte/sehenswuerdigkeiten/reichstag/index.en.php
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) 16:06, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The building continued to be the seat of the parliament of the Weimar Republic (1919–1933), which was still called the Reichstag.  I thought the parliament was in Weimar?--95.90.17.204 (talk) 00:27, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the Weimar Constitution was promulgated there. That's all. Kelisi (talk) 18:22, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weimar Republic