Talk:Early life of Pope Benedict XVI

message: Was membership of the Hitler Youth compulsory?  There was a letter in the Guardian (a british newspaper) recently from an ex-member of the HY saying that it was not, he knew young people who were not members, they did experience difficulties e.g. applying for civil service jobs but nothing drastic. PatGallacher 00:08, 2005 May 3 (UTC)
:*"By 1935, the HJ comprised 60 percent of the country's youth. Following the Nazi seizure of power, other right-wing youth groups were merged into the HJ. From December 1, 1936, under the Jugenddienstpflicht all other youth groups were banned and their membership was merged into the Hitler Youth. HJ membership was made compulsory for youths over 17 in 1939, and for all over the age of 10 in 1941. By 1939, Hitler Youth membership comprised 90 percent of the country's youth." 
:*"In 1936, it became all but compulsory to join the Hitler Youth. Youths could avoid doing any active service if they paid their subscription but this became all but impossible after 1939." 
:*This seems clear: in 1936 Ratzinger was 9; in 1939 he was 12. Only in 1941 did membership for his then age (14) become compulsory. However, the original German text of the 1939 law  suggests 10-14-year-olds had to be part of a youth wing of the HJ (on pain of imprisonment or fine), so I need to do more research. Rd232 08:04, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: *Post 1939 the membership was compulsory, like school. The entry age was not 14, but 10. HBS 09:40, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I do not have the answers and to be honest don't particularly care. I was actually agreeing with you as I can't find reputable sources to verify the statements. The only change I made was an attempt to improve the style of the article. I will change it again as the word fact appearing looks wrong. Big Jock Knew 02:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Membership of Hitler Youth

message: Footnotes are cumbersome. I have just got them in order in this article. The reason why they get jumbled is (I suspect) because editors get confused by the fact that there are only 6 notes but 8 numerical references. Don't be confused, the reason why reference [8] points to note [1] is because that is the first source cited. It just gets cited at the neginning and end of the article. Stroika 21:57, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Footnotes

message: (admitted Catholic apologist Dominick's censorship rv --WIKIPEDIANS: beware Catholic censors and apologists like Dominick prowling this page) 
God forbid. Edit notes like this have no place on Wikipedia. Dominick (TALK) 23:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit notes 

message: "He was posted to the Hungarian border area of Austria ... Here he was trained in the "cult of the spade" ..." - could somebody explain what "cult of the spade" means?--128.139.226.37 18:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If I recall correctly "cult of the spade" was Cardinal Ratzinger's description in his memoir "Milestones" of the work he had to do when in the army digging trenches etc.Stroika 05:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "cult of the spade" 

message: I don't see any relation between the text and the sources cited in the footnote.
--Nrglaw (talk) 06:39, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnote 4 does not support the text 

message: See Talk:Joseph Ratzinger Sr. for links to earlier discussion of deletion of article about Ratzinger's father.--Jahaza (talk) 22:34, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of Father Article