Talk:Emil Maurice

message: What happened to him during the war? What did he do from 1945 to 1972? Lestrade (talk) 16:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need more info 

message: What is the correct German pronunciation of Emil Maurice?82.36.88.163 (talk) 22:17, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: First name is pronounced German ("Ay-meel"), last name is pronounced French (Maw-reese). It's not that atypical a combination in Germany (see for instance Oskar Lafontaine), mainly due to Huguenot immigration to Prussia during the 1700s (see Huguenot#Germany_and_Scandinavia and Edict of Potsdam). --87.180.222.141 (talk) 22:14, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Maurice was by no means considered to be a Mischling according to the Nuremberg Laws. It was his great-grandfather who was Jewish so according to the Nuremberg Laws he would have been considered an "Aryan" and was eligible to be a Reich citizen. His Jewish ancestry was not far back enough though for him to be considered to be an "Aryan" according to the standards of the SS. According to Raul Hilberg's The Destruction of the European Jews he was a Mischling of 'second degree'.--Sein und Zeit (talk) 16:18, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the main issue was that he was considered ineligible for SS membership based on Himmler's own racial code, who ran the SS pretty much as his private organization where his word was law.  Himmler wanted Maurice out for even the slight bit of Jewish ancestry, but Hitler instead protected his old comrade. -O.R.Comms 16:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you. But, the article current just states him as a Mischling when in fact he wasn't considered that by the Nuremberg Laws. The source states he was a Mischling of 'second degree', shouldn't that be added into the article?--Sein und Zeit (talk) 21:31, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I have not had a chance to check RS sources, but I recall some don't go into that much detail and the fact is the term was loosely used. And as OR states, the main point is there was "Jewish blood" found, which prohibited him from SS membership. And since he was an old party member with close ties to Hitler from the early days, that in-and-of itself was enough for Himmler to want him gone (like Himmler tried with Bruno Gesche). But, I don't have a strong objection to that little part. Kierzek (talk) 23:51, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mischling 

message: What is the source that Emil Maurice asked Hitler's niece to marry him? Most every text on the subject states they were at the level of casual flirting and simply dating.  Hitler's outrage stemmed from an incident at the Berghof where he saw Maurice kiss his niece.  The marriage proposal info appears also to be unsourced in the article.  Thoughts? -O.R.Comms 17:19, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The RS sources used do not mention marriage; that was just added into the cited sentence. Kierzek (talk) 17:43, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marriage proposal 

message: A very reliable source (Becoming Hitler: The Making of a Nazi by history professor Thomas Weber) states that Maurice was only 1/8 Jewish (via his great-grandfather).  So the statement about him being a "Mischling" should be removed since the term "Mischling" only referred to people with at least one Jewish grandparent.  It is also undue to have that in the lede; his small amount of Jewish ancestry is covered sufficiently in the body of the article.  Jrheller1 (talk) 07:29, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Weber is actually a problematic source.  His interpretation of events sometimes differs considerably from that of other historians. Do you have another source? Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:40, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a quick look at what Weber wrote this morning before I left for work. I'll take a closer look -- and examine his sources -- tonight. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:03, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Weber is a "source", which requires close cross-checking, to say the least. I await BMK's findings as to this matter. Kierzek (talk) 17:33, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

text: Since other sources were provided in our article for some of the material (Hoffman, Hitler's Personal Security and Hamilton Leaders and Personalities of the Third Reich) and I do not have access to them, so all I have done is to remove (actually, hidden) the statement in the lede that was originally objected to. Jrheller1 is correct that if Maurice's :Jewish heritage" was one great-grandfather, that would not have been considered a Mischling under the Nuremberg Laws, however SS men were supposed to show pure German ancestry going back many more generations than that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:13, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mischling" (again) 

message: I added a lot of date specific content to the article and it was deleted with the backhanded explanation "article already states he was a member; don't need everything and the kitchen sink". Is there a rule as to exactly how much information is allowed in an encyclopaedia? If someone is happy to spend their own time adding content, what's the point if it's going to be deleted because someone thinks it's not worthy/helpful/acceptable? Do I have to run it past someone before it's added? If so, how would I go about that please?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Troy von Tempest (talk • contribs) 04:53, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You do not have to "run [edits] past someone before it's added", but once you do add it, other editors can disagree with its appropriateness and revert it, thus creating a content dispute. It's surprising that you haven't learned this in 7 years of editing here, but content disputes are resolved by discussion here on the article talk page, where a WP:CONSENSUS of editors will decide what should be done.In this case, two editors acting independently decided that some parts of the information you added were either unnecessary or inappropriate, and the burden is on you -- since you are seeking to change the article's long-standing status quo -- to make a convincing argument that the information that was reverted improves the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:59, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact is this is not a bio of exhausted detail. Trivial awards, for example, need not be added. They are not a benefit for general readers for whom we write and we don't need the trivial detraction of the subject. Remember, just adding walls of text or an excessive amount of intricate detail does not lead to a better article; see WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Kierzek (talk) 15:19, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added content 

message: I believe that the aspect ratio of the infobox image in this article is such that presented at the infobox's default value it is too large, the visual equivalent of SHOUTING.  I suggest that the current size is more appropriate. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:05, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If the problem is the aspect ration, then I suggest 200px to better fit the examples presented at ANI. Skjoldbro (talk) 11:52, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? The fact that Maurice's image is a head shot and therefore dominates the page more makes no difference to you? Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:18, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  The size of Maurice's head and Trump's are exactly the same. Skjoldbro (talk) 21:44, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox image size

message: The name 'Emil' (many speakers of German are familiar with Kästner's children's book "Emil und die Detektive") is stressed on the first syllable in German. Both vowels are long. Wathiik (talk) 14:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation