Talk:Lutz Graf Schwerin von Krosigk

message: For readers, providing a smooth link to East German heads of government is preferable. PMA 08:46, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: If as Hebel says his legal name was Johann Ludwig Graf Schwerin von Krosigk, with the title incorporated into his name, then the title of the article should be either Johann Ludwig Graf Schwerin von Krosigk or, without his middle names, Johann Schwerin von Krosigk. The name Graf should not be translated into the English Count, any more than Johann should be translated into the English John. I suggest the article be moved accordingly. Adam 02:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We've actually been discussing the naming of German nobles here: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (names and titles)#German nobility. My own preference would be Johann Graf Schwerin von Krosigk. Mackensen (talk) 02:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I see John's answered the first three, so I'll just field the latter. Mackensen is `my nom de Internet, established before I came here. (And my actual name is Charles, of which I make little secret any more...). Mackensen (talk) 12:22, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Done. Mackensen (talk) 15:14, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: Leading Minister is not like "Reichskanzler", Cancellor of the German "Reich". Leading Minister and Chancellor are total different, it is not even close to "in effect". Last Chancellor was Joseph Goebbels, appointet by Hitler prior to his suicide. 
I took this out of the article. NashvilleD 11:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but Goebbels also commited suicide on May 1st, so perhaps Krosigk was his successor in the last days of the Reich. L337 Krew (talk) 07:20, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Krosigk was the effective Chancellor, but he did not hold the title, and we should not call him Chancellor. john k (talk) 06:03, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: von Krosigk as Chancellor

message: I've seen May 1 and May 2; let's get the template to conform with the article text, or vice versa. Biruitorul 06:43, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: When did he take office?

message: How could he be in the Nazi party and not be a socialist?--LtWinters 23:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whuh?  Most Nazis were not socialists by any normal standard. john k (talk) 06:03, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

text: He was a technocrat, and could easily have been a party member in name only. If he was a Nazi he was not a conservative, much less a "far right conservative" [which is a contradiction in terms anyway]. Nazis were by definition socialist - national socialist. The movement was more left wing than right. The political spectrum is a circle, move to the far left and you get closer to the far right.Royalcourtier (talk) 02:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Party 

message: In this picture is German admiral Günther von Krosigk. Improvisaator (talk) 11:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Why is the May 2 speech listed as an activity "after" WWII?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.119.204.117 (talk) 02:24, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  May 2 speech 

message: What was he charged with? A major detail, surely. If he was "Found guilty in the Ministries Trial in 1949", he must have been charged with something.Royalcourtier (talk) 02:17, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trial