Talk:Zabern Affair

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#:: 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#:: 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#:: 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:Fair representation without bias: 
#:: 
#It is stable.
#:No edit wars etc.: 
#:: 
#It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
#:a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
#:: 
#Overall: 
#:Pass/Fail: 
#:: </div>--Thw1309 (talk) 00:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

message: Hello! I read through your poem translations, the second one seems very good to me, although I changed some sentences.
In the first poem translation, there are some misunderstandings. I tried to translate it again and incorporated some sentences of your translation.
Even though heaps of your kind
away from bayonets and sabre strokes –
March, march! Hupp, hupp! – run the gauntlet:
You are all fond of the lieutenant!
:Only under the blows of a club
:do you really feel at home in the fatherland.
:Damned, those who expose themselves like that,
:after they have unmanned themselves!
:Further you will mercifully got hit
:by the sabre on the brain!
:You are the eunuchs of the German Empire!
:Hurrah, you iron bride!
Kind regards, Tirkfltalk 09:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Poem translations

message: What happened to Forstner?  Lived happily ever after?  Killed in the trenches of the World War?  Survived the war and became a Freikorps member or politician for the DNVP?  If would interesting if someone knew more about him. Poldy Bloom (talk) 10:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: After the affair he was changed to another regiment (Infantry No. 67 in Metz). According to the regiment's chronicle he was killed in action on September 1st, 1914 at Dannevoux, very soon after beginning of the war.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.192.112.18 (talk) 02:34, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Wrong Freiherr von Forstner.  Günther Freiherr von Forstner was transferred to 3. Pommersches Inf.-Rgt. Nr. 14 in Bromberg and was killed in action at Kobrin, Russia on 29 August 1915.  The Leutnant in IR 67 was Friedrich Wilhelm Ernst Freiherr von Forstner (born 8 September 1888).  According to the Gothaische Genealogische Taschenbuch der Freiherrlichen Häuser, six Freiherrs von Forster were killed in action in World War I, so it is easy to mix them up.  World War II U-boat commander Siegfried Freiherr von Forstner (comment below) was a second cousin.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.167.247.35 (talk) 08:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Second Lieutenant Günter Freiherr von Forstner

message: I doubt that there was such a thing.
Only the navy was imperial. The rest was bavarian, prussian, saxonian and so on.
In Zabern these were definitly Prussians.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.19.208.206 (talk) 11:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  German Imperial Army 

message: "Saverne Affair" never, ever appears in the RS. See this ngram. H. Humbert (talk) 10:05, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to Zabern Affair? 

message: I opted to change no-confidence to censure to describe the vote against Bethmann Hollweg because the two tend to have different meanings in English that are well laid out in the first 2 paragraphs of the Wikipedia article Motion of no confidence. What happened in the Zabern Affair is clearly closer to the second, especially given the constitution of the German Empire. In the German article Reichstag (Deutsches Kaiserreich), it says (translated) in the second paragraph of the section Kontrolle der Exekutive: "A minor reform of the Reichstag's rules of procedure in 1912 additionally introduced the right for each deputy to put a minor question to the Reich chancellor. This question was answered without subsequent debate. Furthermore, the right to interpellate [interrupt the order of the day by demanding an explanation from the minister concerned] was extended to the effect that the question under discussion could be put to the vote. This was the case ... in connection with the Zabern affair in 1913, when the Reichstag criticized Reich Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg by a large majority. This remained without consequences under constitutional law, however, because it was covered only by the rules of procedure but not by constitutional law." 
If anyone disagrees with the change, please let me know.  GHStPaulMN (talk) 19:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote of censure vs. no-confidence