Talk:Germania (city)

message: Other researchers into the logistics of Hitler's Welthaupstadt...  Do we know who these others are? Markyour words 20:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other researchers 

message: "Speer also designed a new Chancellery, which included a vast hall designed to be twice as long as the Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles. Hitler wanted him to build a third, even larger Chancellery, although it was never begun. The second Chancellery was destroyed by the Soviet army in 1945."
^That's a lie. The Third Reichs Chancellery (west of the Großer Platz on the location of former Kroll Opera House) would have had the same area as the Second Reich Chancellery building (the Chancellery garden itself would have accomodated the Führerpalast). And f by "third RC" you mean one of the twin buildings south of Großer Platz, those buildings were each one half the lenght of the Neue Reichskanzlei.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.230.99.30 (talk) 00:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third Chancellery 

message: For the picture thats at the top of the article, whats at the bottom of the picture? Theres the Great Hall at the top and the Arch in the middle, but whats at the very bottom?
: That's the Südbahnhof.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.106.22.171 (talk) 04:52, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whats at the bottom of the top picture? 

message: It seems that Hitler and the Nazis were (like many others in particular as from the 1870 successful war against France by Prussia) from the start obsessed with the possible significance within Europe of the originally ancient Europe 'Arch of Triumph' as created in Paris under the Napoleonic empire, this form of architecture being something therefore originating in classical times (see http://honorsaharchive.blogspot.co.uk/2007/01/propaganda-of-roman-triumph-and-arch-of.html ).
What remains to be seen is how this particular connection will be associated with the centenary of the world wars and in particular how this works out so far as the Russians and other previously Soviet states are concerned in Berlin in 2045 (see the evident connection in this particular case, but also associated with numerous others throughout Europe, within the Welthauptstadt Germania article).
It is I myself suggest very much indeed to be hoped in the interest of peace and understanding throghout the world that the Council of Europe will work all this out, or at least as far as possible, in due time so that everybody is in accordance when the year in question (the centenary of the end of the Second World War, 2045) eventually arrives, since it may otherwise, I repeat, be extremely controversial from a political point of view. 
That is my own personal view that I have seen nowhere else but I do believe in this connection that it seems that given the number of people that currently read this article (about nine thousand over the past thirty days) some are perhaps already aware of this possible (and also possibly complicated) eventual event, in particular within Berlin itself (I am afraid that I am not myself particularly competent on the Internet and I do not know whether it will be possible to deal with this sort of issue of history and architecture either within this article or in a new article but I repeat that in any event I do hope it will be dealt with by our Council of Europe, which Council at an international level has covered both east and west of the continent as from its creation in 1949, the solution of this sort of problem being evidently what was hoped it might manage eventually to do).  
Peter Judge  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.30.190.152 (talk) 15:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The possible intended historical significance of the planned German "Welthauptstadt" (world capital) and the 1945 Soviet war memorial 

message: Does anyone know how big the model was?  My best guess, having seen other photos of it,
is "huge".
BMJ-pdx (talk) 05:59, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: 10 feet high at least, according to photos in Albert Speer's book Inside The Third Reich Cramyourspam (talk) 02:19, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  How big was the model? 

message: Can someone clarify this sentence in the "Planning" section:
  "The arc would have been near by, but problems with the Axis running through infrastructure would have made it difficult to establish any convenient location."
First of all, plain "Axis" makes it sounds like the Axis powers.  Is the intention the
East-West Axis or North-South Axis (of the city), or the axis (centerline) of the bridge?
And shouldn't that be "Arch" (of Triumph), not "arc"?
BMJ-pdx (talk) 06:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: a transportation ring encircled the city --arcs refer to its curves. the 'axis' was merely north-south and east-west roadways with no connection to the triparate pact of 'axis' fame.  you can read the essence of it online here  and get the story in context online on pages 71-82 here  --10 or so pages that should explain everything in the words of the designer. (note: on some web browsers, the second URL/link I gave will return a 'not found' error, but that is due to some wiki auto-format oddities not actually in my link. if that happens, delete the '%7C' after the URL's '.pdf' and the book should appear as a readable and downloadable .pdf file. i'm sorry i have no idea why wikipedia converts the straightforward link into something with extra text characters which lead to the 'not found' result.) Cramyourspam (talk) 02:36, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please explain "arc" and "Axis" in "Planning" section. 

message: Since Inside the Third Reich by Albert Speer can be read online, I checked two statements in the articles sourced with this book (one was right, indeed). I couldn't find any reference to "Welthaupstadt Germania" or "World Capital city Germania" or simply "Germania" in the book. The statement "The outbreak of World War II in 1939 caused the decision to postpone construction until after the war to save strategic materials" is also debatable, because in that book we discover that Hitler didn't give up his idea of creating new buildings in Berlin until 1941, when Speer was forced to go to Ukraine.--Carnby (talk) 08:35, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Please link to where it can be read online. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:24, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Here.--Carnby (talk) 18:06, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:41, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

text: The "Great Hall" was central to the redesign of Berlin. Search on "Great Hall" or "Triumphal Arch" for multiple discussion of Speers part in the planned redesign of Berlin. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:35, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but Speer does not say the plans were scrapped down in 1939, nor the new imperial Berlin was to be called "(Welthaupstadt) Germania".--Carnby (talk) 08:57, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I think I've taken care of both of those problems. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:16, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Just one more question: I notice you left unchanged "The outbreak of World War II in 1939 caused the decision to postpone construction until after the war to save strategic materials" sourced with Speer, Albert (1970). Inside the Third Reich. Simon & Schuster. I wasn't able to find that statement in the book printed by The Macmillan Company. Are you assuming in that edition there are some different paragraphs? Thanks in advance.--Carnby (talk) 21:15, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, missed that.  I've removed it now.  The stopping of construction in general is now covered in a separate section, so there's no need for it in the Triumphal Arch section. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I suspect, though, that the sentence is roughly correct.  Near the end of the war there was a shortage of steel, due to a shortage of coal, and -- as important -- a severe shortage of manpower.  Whether Speer mentions that in Inside or not, I'm not sure, but it's pretty widely reported in the literature. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:32, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you!--Carnby (talk) 09:32, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two dubious statements (source "Inside the Third Reich" by Albert Speer) 

message: Léon Krier has a good opinion on Speer as an architect and the Berlin plan https://elpais.com/icon-design/arte/2021-06-22/breve-historia-de-atlantis-la-ciudad-utopica-que-nunca-se-llego-a-construir-en-tenerife.html .
:Estoy seguro de que, si el plan de Speer para Berlín se hubiera realizado, podría haberse adaptado a una sociedad democrática y hoy sería una referencia de metrópolis moderna y sostenible
I was going to add it but I don't find this article has a place for assessments by later architects.
--Error (talk) 23:34, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Krier