Talk:History of Berlin

message: What does " reigned over a brilliant court. " even mean? Sound like opinion rather than fact.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.4.24.127 (talk) 18:10, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is no one watching this article? I can't believe this piece of vandalism went unnoticed for three days! Arrgh! Angr (talk • contribs) 22:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: "1920s Berlin was a very exciting and interesting city." 
I don't think we need to have this sentence in the article twice? Which one to remove?
Thanks!
Evilbu 12:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  repeating itself about "exciting and interesting" 

message: The image :File:1938 Interior of Berlin synagogue after Kristallnacht.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:55, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:1938 Interior of Berlin synagogue after Kristallnacht.jpg

message: The timeline passively says that the German leaders made no distiction between the two very distinct populations (Germans and Slavs), and that they happily intermarried - sounds like wishful thinking on the part of the poster. This is especially problematic since there is much scholarly debate on whether or not the overwhelming majority of the native Slavs were exterminated, routed, or died out due to disease, leaving almost no Slavic population except in the distant countryside. Thus, that line needs some more citation and at least discussion on this question.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.0.207.191 (talk) 14:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  disappearing Slavic population 

message: What means "250 m high, seven times higher than St. Peter's Basilica in Rome" for the Volkshalle? The St. Peter's Basilica in Rome is 138 m high, so seven times higher would mean about 1000 m, not 250 m!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.47.240.87 (talk) 03:32, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Volkshalle 

message: According to this entry, Berlin became the royal resident right after the building of the Stadschloss was conpleted, in 1451. according to the Berlin.de site (here) it was in 1486. could someone help me?  Johnb999 (talk) 18:02, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  When did Berlin became the royal resident? 

message: This article is of course crap, and has been ever since it was created. Some years ago when I was active at Wikipedia under other name, I started writing a replacement article, but I only got to 1848 before I decided I'd had enough of Wikipedia's strange blend of anarchy and dictatorship and stopped editing. However, I see this article hasn't improved any, so I thought I'd dump my draft here in case anyone is interested in improving the article. It isn't referenced, but anyone who knows Berlin history could do that. Of course it's far too well written for Wikipedia standards, but I'm sure the usual flock of Wikipedia autodidacts will quickly dumb it down and insert the necessary bad grammar and irrelevant comments which are Wikipedia's hallmarks. Alles gut. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 23:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Draft of new article (to 1848)

message: I added a terrific U.S. Air Force film made in July 1945 showing the destruction of downtown Berlin.  I brought it over from the German edition of Wikipedia, there article on Berlin.  The problem is that it is too big for the screen – can anyone help resize it?? Rjensen (talk) 17:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Need technical help

message: The statement 'In the Reichstag, the vote for credits was unanimous, with all the Socialists joining in...' is untrue. Please see the entry for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Liebknecht under 'political career' it clearly states that 'On 2 December 1914 he was the only member of the Reichstag to vote against further loans, the supporters of which included 110 of his own Party members.'  
These two articles are in conflict.
Norrette  — Preceding unsigned comment added by LRC Techie (talk • contribs) 13:46, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  First World War 

message: What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 15:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Timeline of Berlin]] 

message: here it says that it was built in the year 1647, yet, in another Wikipedia article titled "Unter den Linden", it states that "Unter den Linden, which sits at the heart of the historic section of Berlin, developed from a bridle path laid out by Elector John George of Brandenburg in the 16th century".
So, which is the correct one?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sherif Sonbol (talk • contribs) 20:34, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradicting 2 articles about who built  The boulevard "Unter den Linden"?  

message: This part is poor, and deals far too much with the Nazi time. The Publisher Pharus began making city plans for Berlin as early as in 1902. The Pharus Plan of 1927 (Groß Berlin 1927) apparently is the most significant one. I visited Berlin recently and bought a replicate of that map. German ISBN 978-3-86514-179-8. The 1926 central parts exists at Commons -  , the central part seems exactly alike the larger version from the following year. Pharus has continued to make German city plans until "West Berlin - Terra Inkognita" in 1988. Boeing720 (talk) 22:31, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greater Berlin  

message: Berlin is mentioned as a town for the first time in 1251... The year 1237 was later taken as the year of founding. 
:That was Hitler wanting an excuse for a big centenary event. Historians were not happy about it. Perhaps someone has a cite for this. Valetude (talk) 16:51, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of Foundation 

message: This article completely glosses over the Golden Twenties (:de:Goldene Zwanziger) a flowering of the arts, science, and openness to new ideas including personal expression that had lasting impact worldwide. Mathglot (talk) 10:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Golden Twenties 

message: I propose merging Capital of Germany into History of Berlin. I think the content in Capital of Germany can easily be explained in the context of History of Berlin, and a merge would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in this article. Plus, they both address one topic: Berlin. 🅲🅻🅴🆃🅴🆁 (a word) 02:28, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  My count must be off somewhere, because there are a handful like Capital of Wales, Capital of Sri Lanka, Capital of the Netherlands, Temporary capital of Lithuania, but the general principle still holds. Mathglot (talk) 19:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Oppose This article provides a specific and notable perspective that couldn't be viewed in context if broken apart. The history of Germany is somewhat unique in that its capital moved around quite a lot. It's not just the recent history of West Germany and Bonn. The movement of the capital is a significant aspect of the history of Germany and notable enough to deserve its own article, where the context of its movement can be made apparent. JackTheSecond (talk) 14:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested merge 5 February 2024