Talk:Nazi plunder

message: New documentary playing in theatres now:
http://www.rapeofeuropa.com/
Green Squares (talk) 21:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: policy guidelines would seem to suggest otherwise. --Rodhullandemu 14:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a documentary about this topic, therefore allowed. Green Squares (talk) 16:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a bit of a grey area.  It should probably not be included, since it's a link to a site intended to promote a commercial product, but at the very least, it doesn't deserve first place. Primaryspace (talk) 17:06, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rape of Europa

message: The linked sources are in Polish.  Can the author who included them please indicate here if the cited numbers for looted objects are specifically for those items looted in Poland, or if they indicate items looted in all of Europe?  Also, are these numbers for items looted solely by Nazis, or for items looted by both Nazis and Soviets?  An English translation of the source would be appreciated. Primaryspace (talk) 17:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Poland

message: The introduction claims:
 Nazi plunder refers to art theft and other items stolen as a result[...]
While the phrase and its meaning are correct, the use of "refers" seems dubious
to me: The current implication is that "Nazi plunder" has a meaning that is
somewhat formalized and fixed. (To exemplify: "North America" has a sufficiently
formalized meaning that "refers" would be justified, but "Northern America"
does not.)
Correspondingly, the "refers" should only be left in, if a similar
formalization is present e.g. in art or history academia. In my opinion this is
not the case, and the formulation should be changed.
A later section claims:
 After the occupation of Poland by German and Soviet forces in September 1939, the Nazi and Stalinist regimes attempted to exterminate its population as well
as culture.
This is a very far going claim that is not necessarily born out (although I
have heard similar claims before), and the inclusion would necessitate a very
solid reference. As is, a review of a single source is given as the only
reference. I would suggest a removal or a more solid reference.
I note that while the allegeded deliberate extermination of culture is
significant to this article, the same claim about the population is not.
94.220.243.32 (talk) 23:11, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claims of disputable validity 

message: My thoughts are just in the beginning stages right now, and I don't know where to go, so I'm bringing this to the two pages concerned.  It'll take a bit before its clear why I am here.
Recently, Japanese cultural artifacts controversy survived its second AfD, but in order to do so, it had to be chopped down to little more than a stub. (Current appearance).  The issues that precipitated the AfD were largely ones of POV, but it survived, in part, because someone pointed out the existence of this article.  Then, after the AfD, an editor made the following salient point: the title is misleading because the cultural artifacts aren't Japanese, and of course, that's true—they're Korean and Chinese and othersuch artifacts.  So I decided to find a new title.  And in thinking about the matter, I finally looked at this article, Nazi plunder.
Nazi plunder certainly is a more accurate title than JCAC.  So what about renaming JCAC Japanese plunder?  Ahhh, but now the problem becomes clear, because (except perhaps to the Koreans), the term "Japanese plunder" would be deemed so POV that it would never stay there.  Nazi plunder is not a problem because today, no one reputable wants to be considered an heir to the name "Nazi".  But this is not so with the Japanese; a hundred million still are proud to be called Japanese.  Perhaps had this article been called German plunder, then maybe Japanese plunder would survive, but of course its not.
So what I would like to do would be to find a name that works for both articles, with a parenthetical distinction.  Something like this:
*World War II artifact relocation controversy (Europe) and
*World War II artifact relocation controversy (Asia)
or perhaps this: 
*Artifact relocation controversy, World War II (Germany) and
*Artifact relocation controversy, World War II (Japan)
I'm not stuck on either of these, I'm just providing them as examples of what I'd like to see happen.  The Japanese article is just a stub now, and I think that properly titling it will help it to grow, without becoming too POV.  
Any thoughts, anyone? Unschool 17:17, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I never liked "Nazi plunder", which seems to colloquial, and not that descriptive, but "artifact relocation controversy" seems as bad, just from the other side. I am open to better naming suggestions (I support including nationality - German and Japanese - in names), but I would have to object to the titles proposed above. Perhaps Nazi German plunder of cultural artifacts/Japanese plunder of cultural artifacts during World War II? Not that I am very happy with my suggested titles, neither (and I am not a native English speaker). Does the literature offer any suggestions? Wikipedia itself would suggest using art theft but also looted art, so maybe Nazi German art theft and Japanese art theft during World War II, or  Nazi German art looting and Japanese art looting during World War II? PS. I am surprised we didn't have a main article for art theft during WWII; I've stubbed Art theft and looting during World War II for now. I actually like this name the best, so I'd suggest the following names: Art theft and looting by Nazi Germany and Art theft and looting by Japan during World War II (do we really need the "during World War II" qualifier?). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  18:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Art(i/e)facts relocation controversy" is silly.  "World War II plunder of cultural art(i/e)facts" might be a reasonable name for the parent article with "Nazi plunder of cultural art(i/e)facts" area good name for this daughter article, not sure enough about the Japanese equivalent.  Guettarda (talk) 19:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: yeah, plunder is a bit "in your face". "looting" is good, what with the looted art article, but i'm not sure it also covers the phenomenon of people forced to "sell" their belongings at nominal prices under duress and/or imminent deportation. Gzuckier (talk) 21:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What Piotrus has done in starting that stub is great.  It provides us, if not a framework, at least some guiding principles.  All the articles need to have parallel titles, as Piotrus appears to have done.  But the specifics are important to me.  I would prefer to not have the articles with the titles that we see in the stub now, simply for this reason—they are not "parallel".  One refers to Japan, one to the Soviet Union (and thank you, Piotrus, for thinking to include that), and the other, if it was parallel, would refer to Germany.  But instead it refers to Nazi Germany.  It's not that I don't like the use of Nazi Germany, in fact, it's the best of the titles, because it makes all the more clear when this is taking place.  But I  wish we had names for the USSR and Japan which reflected their regiemes and their time places.   Any ideas?  Unschool 22:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Agree, there's no controversy, at least about those who lost the wars. As to looting vs. plunder - is the difference sufficiently strong to motivate plunder > looting rename? NVO (talk) 15:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

text:  Mervyn: the suggestion expands scopes of each topic, perhaps too far for their current state. Also, it emphasized role of the state as opposed to private bounty hunters (the latter is relevant mostly for the Brits, i.e. Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin et al., the Spanish and Portuguese in Americas etc.). Not that it's an inappropriate stance, but Appropriation by the British Empire, as a state, will be quite lame. Appropriation by the (state) is a good choice only in cases of direct (and notable) state action (Germany, the Union, not sure about Japan). NVO (talk) 15:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, happy to forget the complications of British Empire and Japan for now ... but do you think [Appropriation of cultural property by Nazi Germany] seems best suggestion for accuracy and neutrality to avoid problematic connotations of the terms plunder or loot or theft? --mervyn (talk) 08:11, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Though to me "looting" conveys more the idea of unorganised theft, rather than something systematic and state-supported, as in WW2. --mervyn (talk) 09:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Can you think of a name which would encompass all the "plunder" of all nations during WW II? Unschool 03:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: After consideration, I'm going to reverse myself.  The suggested titles are accurate.  My choice, which I've added above, would be: Art theft and looting during World War II by (country name)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Primaryspace (talk • contribs) 15:30, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Okinawasan, thank you for your insight into the larger scope of art theft and for your discussion at Talk:Looted art. I think when formulating a naming convention we should avoid the wordy "cultural property" or "artifact controversy," and go with/settle for "Art..." for the time being, and I'll explain why shortly. Also, I think words like theft, loot, plunder would not provide a world view amid controversies over art provenance and art repatriation. I'm starting to like Art provenance for its scope and neutrality, however it worked into the convention.
I think Art theft and looting during World War II adds great structure to Art theft, which which is a well-organized, little-discussed article that distinguishes between individual theft, state theft, wartime looting and misappropriation by museums, and chronologically details famous cases of art theft. It could serve as a great outline for the eventual expansion of these types of art-related "plundering" or recent "theft" articles. If its name were changed to something neutral, like Art theft and relocation or Art theft and appropriation, the article could include public gifts (ex. Cleopatra's Needle), controversial/questionable relocations (Elgin Marbles,Korean antiquities) and outright sacking of ancient cities.
I would like to bring to your attention a few related articles to consider:
* Looted art - It's in dismal condition and should be completely merged into art theft in my opinion. Its structure (Sections: "Looting of Countries" and "Looting by perpetrator") and use of "perpetrator" could in some cases be POV.
* Works of Art with Contested Provenance - an old, very short article
* Looting - contains many instances of theft of cultural artifacts that should be merged into art theft and provided as a main article link. It is also serves as the redirect for sacking, pillaging, plunder, and others. Ruodyssey (talk) 15:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible page move 

message: This is just to place the proposed terms side by side, for easy consideration
====Key word choices====
*Plunder
*Looting
*Theft
*Appropriation
*Relocation
*Provenance
*Repatriation
====Proposed Titles====
*(Country name) plunder
*Plunder by (country name)
*(Country name) art looting during World War II
*Art theft and looting by (country name)
*Appropriation of cultural property by (country name)
*World War II artifact relocation controversy (country name)
*Artifact relocation controversy, World War II (country name)
*(Country name) art theft 
*(Country name) plunder of cultural artifacts during World War II
*(Country name) looting of cultural artifacts during World War II
* Art theft and looting during World War II by (country name)
====Comments on current proposals====
*I think that the most critical thing is to decide which word will be used to describe what these countries did.  So I've listed the words used so far.  I didn't like "looting" at first, but now that's what I'm leaning towards.  Unschool 19:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Though to me "looting" conveys more the idea of unorganised theft, rather than something systematic and state-supported, as in WW2. --mervyn (talk) 09:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Can you think of a name which would encompass all the "plunder" of all nations during WW II? Unschool 03:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: After consideration, I'm going to reverse myself.  The suggested titles are accurate.  My choice, which I've added above, would be: Art theft and looting during World War II by (country name)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Primaryspace (talk • contribs) 15:30, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Okinawasan, thank you for your insight into the larger scope of art theft and for your discussion at Talk:Looted art. I think when formulating a naming convention we should avoid the wordy "cultural property" or "artifact controversy," and go with/settle for "Art..." for the time being, and I'll explain why shortly. Also, I think words like theft, loot, plunder would not provide a world view amid controversies over art provenance and art repatriation. I'm starting to like Art provenance for its scope and neutrality, however it worked into the convention.
I think Art theft and looting during World War II adds great structure to Art theft, which which is a well-organized, little-discussed article that distinguishes between individual theft, state theft, wartime looting and misappropriation by museums, and chronologically details famous cases of art theft. It could serve as a great outline for the eventual expansion of these types of art-related "plundering" or recent "theft" articles. If its name were changed to something neutral, like Art theft and relocation or Art theft and appropriation, the article could include public gifts (ex. Cleopatra's Needle), controversial/questionable relocations (Elgin Marbles,Korean antiquities) and outright sacking of ancient cities.
I would like to bring to your attention a few related articles to consider:
* Looted art - It's in dismal condition and should be completely merged into art theft in my opinion. Its structure (Sections: "Looting of Countries" and "Looting by perpetrator") and use of "perpetrator" could in some cases be POV.
* Works of Art with Contested Provenance - an old, very short article
* Looting - contains many instances of theft of cultural artifacts that should be merged into art theft and provided as a main article link. It is also serves as the redirect for sacking, pillaging, plunder, and others. Ruodyssey (talk) 15:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: List of proposals

message: *I think that the most critical thing is to decide which word will be used to describe what these countries did.  So I've listed the words used so far.  I didn't like "looting" at first, but now that's what I'm leaning towards.  Unschool 19:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Though to me "looting" conveys more the idea of unorganised theft, rather than something systematic and state-supported, as in WW2. --mervyn (talk) 09:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Can you think of a name which would encompass all the "plunder" of all nations during WW II? Unschool 03:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: After consideration, I'm going to reverse myself.  The suggested titles are accurate.  My choice, which I've added above, would be: Art theft and looting during World War II by (country name)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Primaryspace (talk • contribs) 15:30, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments on current proposals

message: While i can see the fascination of World War II in a claim and reparation driven political and social environment, we might also want to consider the bigger picture of art theft, looting, relocation or recovery. I believe, that its a good idea if a naming declaration also considers examples like the looting of Europe by Napoleon, the plunder of the Imperial Palace in China by Western armies, or the systematic art theft in Iraq.Okinawasan (talk) 20:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Okinawasan, thank you for your insight into the larger scope of art theft and for your discussion at Talk:Looted art. I think when formulating a naming convention we should avoid the wordy "cultural property" or "artifact controversy," and go with/settle for "Art..." for the time being, and I'll explain why shortly. Also, I think words like theft, loot, plunder would not provide a world view amid controversies over art provenance and art repatriation. I'm starting to like Art provenance for its scope and neutrality, however it worked into the convention.
I think Art theft and looting during World War II adds great structure to Art theft, which which is a well-organized, little-discussed article that distinguishes between individual theft, state theft, wartime looting and misappropriation by museums, and chronologically details famous cases of art theft. It could serve as a great outline for the eventual expansion of these types of art-related "plundering" or recent "theft" articles. If its name were changed to something neutral, like Art theft and relocation or Art theft and appropriation, the article could include public gifts (ex. Cleopatra's Needle), controversial/questionable relocations (Elgin Marbles,Korean antiquities) and outright sacking of ancient cities.
I would like to bring to your attention a few related articles to consider:
* Looted art - It's in dismal condition and should be completely merged into art theft in my opinion. Its structure (Sections: "Looting of Countries" and "Looting by perpetrator") and use of "perpetrator" could in some cases be POV.
* Works of Art with Contested Provenance - an old, very short article
* Looting - contains many instances of theft of cultural artifacts that should be merged into art theft and provided as a main article link. It is also serves as the redirect for sacking, pillaging, plunder, and others. Ruodyssey (talk) 15:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bigger Picture 

message: In the last paragraph there are citation tags that should not be there. (Of course we cant know how many, exactly, were stolen. Of course a legitimate art market would want to avoid illegitimate goods...It wouldnt be a legitimate market if it was illegitimate...)
But I think the whole thing is original research and should be deleted if it cant be backed up by something. 74.132.249.206 (talk) 13:57, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many citation needed tags. 

message: The use of the photograph and dubious explanation of Hermann Göring Division soldiers posing with artwork is inappropriate for this page.  As the Bundesarchive description states, but is conveniently ignored here, the scene was a part of the organized transfer of the treasures, archive and library of Monte Cassino to the Vatican (artworks of the Naples gallery were sent previously to Monte Cassino for safekeeping) -- before the ancient monastery was destroyed by American bombing.  In other words, the photo actually represents a rare effort by German troops to save art and treasures in a foreign country from Allied destruction.  See Hapgood, David and Richardson, David, Monte Cassino. New York: Congdon & Weed, Inc., 1984; pages 51 through 60, 242.
I’ll give this some time, then remove the photo and description.  A correct representation and background of the image would be contra to the thrust of the page.TrinityGate (talk) 20:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki Fib? 

message: Is there a page for this current news story: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/08/nazi-gold-train-investigators-start-excavating-poland John a s (talk) 00:29, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Nazi gold train in Poland 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Nazi plunder. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www8.cnn.com/US/9812/03/holocaust.conference/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Nazi plunder. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.msz.gov.pl/Rewindykacja,dobr,kultury,1775.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081120113737/http://www.lootedartrecovery.com/ to http://www.lootedartrecovery.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070203023135/http://www.civs.gouv.fr/uk/autre/index.htm to http://www.civs.gouv.fr/uk/autre/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060512112314/http://www.michiganhistorymag.com/extra/pdfs/ja00dia.pdf to http://www.michiganhistorymag.com/extra/pdfs/ja00dia.pdf
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) 21:57, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Nazi plunder. 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/20090419183319/http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/12-18-45.htm to http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/12-18-45.htm
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) 17:17, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Nazi plunder. 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  tag to http://www.durchblick-siegen.de/themes/ds/pdf/01_05/seite12.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150211224449/http://www.herkomstgezocht.nl/eng/nkcollectie/woordenboek.html to http://www.herkomstgezocht.nl/eng/nkcollectie/woordenboek.html/
*Added  tag to http://www.lostart.ru/lost/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121103093859/http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-17085369.html to http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-17085369.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100309022822/http://www.sdmart.org/provenance/Index.html to http://www.sdmart.org/provenance/Index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100612194341/http://lacma.org/art/ProvIntro.aspx to http://www.lacma.org/art/ProvIntro.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050827111058/http://www.lootedart.com/International/International%20Bodies%20and%20Reports/Orcid_GSF_38002_4627314815.asp to http://www.lootedart.com/International/International%20Bodies%20and%20Reports/Orcid_GSF_38002_4627314815.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070901045630/http://www.mkidn.gov.pl/kolekcje/en/ to http://www.mkidn.gov.pl/kolekcje/en/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070110153944/http://www.claims.state.ny.us/ to http://www.claims.state.ny.us/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070612063938/http://www.restitution.or.at/index.php to http://www.restitution.or.at/index.php
*Added  tag to http://www.lootedartrecovery.com/looted-art/resources/resolution1205.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.lootedartrecovery.com/looted-art/resources/vilniusforum.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.lootedartrecovery.com/looted-art/resources/EOP.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050827111058/http://www.lootedart.com/International/International%20Bodies%20and%20Reports/Orcid_GSF_38002_4627314815.asp to http://www.lootedart.com/International/International%20Bodies%20and%20Reports/Orcid_GSF_38002_4627314815.asp
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) 02:52, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: The Lead could be edited to better explain the different sections of the article and tie them together instead of giving a brief historical summary that isn't touched upon in the rest of the article. Certain aspects are mentioned in the Lead that don't show up anywhere else in the article, i.e. The MFAA. Abigail Hately (talk) 07:28, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Lead Possible Changes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
In this Wikipedia article, I will be adding more information about the loot Nazi Germany stole during WWll. The article lacks information about what was taken from other countries such as France, the Netherlands, and Italy. My source is "Stolen words: the Nazi plunder of Jewish books" by Mark Glickman. Mark Glickman is an author who has served at congregations in Ohio, Washington State, and Colorado and written other Jewish history books. The book I will be using as a source talks mostly of the Jewish books and writings stolen by Nazi Germany, so my Wikipedia article will be mostly focusing on that. All together I plan on adding around 200 words to this article. If anyone wants to comment on these changes, please let me know on this Talk Page or on my Talk Page. Any help/feedback is greatly appreciated. 
After further consideration I have decided to change my edits from different locations and consolidate it into Jewish books stolen since most of my additions will be about that, I will still be using the same source.
Anderson.Mar (talk) 22:39, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding New Information 

message: Hello all, in this specific Wikipedia Article, I will be adding some information on Nazi looted art in Austria mainly. My source is, "A Tragic Fate, Law and Ethics in the Battle over Nazi-Looted Art" by Nicholas M. Donnell. The author, Donnell, is part of the Art Law Committee of the New York City Bar Association and is well versed in the procedures and history of Nazi looted art. This addition to the article will focus on how difficult it is to obtain stolen pieces of art taken from the Nazis and partly some of the extent to which they took in Austria. I plan on adding around 200 words to this article. If anyone wants to comment on these changes, please let me know on this Talk Page or on my Talk Page. Thank you. --Vanessa1290 (talk) 05:05, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding New Information 

message: The current name (the problem is known since 2009, see above) misinforms. It is mostly (95%) about arts. It is not about golden teeth, old shues and hair.Xx236 (talk) 07:49, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nazi plunder of arts