Talk:History of Austria

message: Howdy.  Is there no specific entry on Wikipedia dealing with the annexation of Austria by Nazi Germany? Oberiko 00:05, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: No specific entry on annexation?

message: I removed the following code from the top of the "The Nineteenth Century (1815-1918)" section:
I don't know what this line was supposed to do, but whatever it was, it wasn't doing it properly, and was mostly just showing the code.  Herostratus 20:52, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  whats this 

message: ===Version by Ulritz===
At the end of World War II, Austria was overrun by Allied Forces.
  
On March 28, 1945, American troops set foot on Austrian soil, with the Red Army crossing the eastern border two days later, capturing Vienna by April 13. US and British forces occupied the western and southern parts of the country, securing Austria from complete Soviet domination, marking an end to Nazi rule. 
====Comments on version by Ulritz====
This version looks as if it were written by someone who supported nazism and is kind of disappointed that the Allies and Red Army freed the Austrian people from Nazi ruled imposed on them since 1938. No offence. Rex 13:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Classic revisionism- the poor Austrians, how could they vote for inclusion into the Reich (headed by a  compatriot), having greeted their "oppresors" with cheers? See the discussion about the word "liberation" on words to avoid, which sparked the protests of Poles and Ukrainains, who were far more liberated than the Austrians, who, besides having a disproportionate role in the spread of Nazism, fought the liberators, housed concentration camps, etc. -indisputable facts which find no refelction in RG's whitewashed, lopsided version. Of course there are many more facts, but these alone prove how indefensible RG's POV is. Ulritz 13:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Comparing Austrian-run camps with Austro-German camps in Poland won't get you anywhere, nor will drifting off topic. Ulritz 14:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Im sorry I even bothered, though it just proves how helpless you are in the face of solid arguments by turning this into a 'cops and robbers' scenario. Ulritz 14:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well put John k. BTW the current formulation is much better, but the whole WWII section needs expansion - I will work on that if I get the chance as this is an area I've done research in. Dmhaglund 10:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: At the end of World War II, Austria was overrun by Allied Forces.
  
On March 28, 1945, American troops set foot on Austrian soil, with the Red Army crossing the eastern border two days later, capturing Vienna by April 13. US and British forces occupied the western and southern parts of the country, securing Austria from complete Soviet domination, marking an end to Nazi rule. 
====Comments on version by Ulritz====
This version looks as if it were written by someone who supported nazism and is kind of disappointed that the Allies and Red Army freed the Austrian people from Nazi ruled imposed on them since 1938. No offence. Rex 13:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Version by [[User:Ulritz|Ulritz]]

message: This version looks as if it were written by someone who supported nazism and is kind of disappointed that the Allies and Red Army freed the Austrian people from Nazi ruled imposed on them since 1938. No offence. Rex 13:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments on version by [[User:Ulritz|Ulritz]]

message: At the end of World War II, Austria was liberated from Nazi rule by Allied Forces. 
- On March 30, 1945 Red Army forces entered the country, and on April 13 freed Vienna. US and British forces freed the western and southern parts of the country. 
====Comments on version by Rex====
History is subjected to opinions from contemporary times. Today Austrians (or at least I hope they do) feel that they were liberated from the Nazis and German domination. Wikipedia should reflect contemporary opinions. 
Rex 13:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Classic revisionism- the poor Austrians, how could they vote for inclusion into the Reich (headed by a  compatriot), having greeted their "oppresors" with cheers? See the discussion about the word "liberation" on words to avoid, which sparked the protests of Poles and Ukrainains, who were far more liberated than the Austrians, who, besides having a disproportionate role in the spread of Nazism, fought the liberators, housed concentration camps, etc. -indisputable facts which find no refelction in RG's whitewashed, lopsided version. Of course there are many more facts, but these alone prove how indefensible RG's POV is. Ulritz 13:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Comparing Austrian-run camps with Austro-German camps in Poland won't get you anywhere, nor will drifting off topic. Ulritz 14:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Im sorry I even bothered, though it just proves how helpless you are in the face of solid arguments by turning this into a 'cops and robbers' scenario. Ulritz 14:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well put John k. BTW the current formulation is much better, but the whole WWII section needs expansion - I will work on that if I get the chance as this is an area I've done research in. Dmhaglund 10:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Version by [[User:Rex Germanus|Rex]], or version before [[User:Ulritz|Ulritz' edits]]

message: History is subjected to opinions from contemporary times. Today Austrians (or at least I hope they do) feel that they were liberated from the Nazis and German domination. Wikipedia should reflect contemporary opinions. 
Rex 13:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Classic revisionism- the poor Austrians, how could they vote for inclusion into the Reich (headed by a  compatriot), having greeted their "oppresors" with cheers? See the discussion about the word "liberation" on words to avoid, which sparked the protests of Poles and Ukrainains, who were far more liberated than the Austrians, who, besides having a disproportionate role in the spread of Nazism, fought the liberators, housed concentration camps, etc. -indisputable facts which find no refelction in RG's whitewashed, lopsided version. Of course there are many more facts, but these alone prove how indefensible RG's POV is. Ulritz 13:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Comparing Austrian-run camps with Austro-German camps in Poland won't get you anywhere, nor will drifting off topic. Ulritz 14:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Im sorry I even bothered, though it just proves how helpless you are in the face of solid arguments by turning this into a 'cops and robbers' scenario. Ulritz 14:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well put John k. BTW the current formulation is much better, but the whole WWII section needs expansion - I will work on that if I get the chance as this is an area I've done research in. Dmhaglund 10:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments on version by [[User:Rex Germanus|Rex]]

message: This website has information on the history of Austria that might be useful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.232.66.25 (talk) 08:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Source of Information

message: Grüß Gott,
does anyone else think the following sentence is a bit long? It is from the section about the 30 Years War:
"His forced conversions or evictions carried out in the midst of the Thirty Years' War, which with the later general success of the Protestants therefore had greatly negative consequences for Habsburg control of the Holy Roman Empire itself, while these campaigns within the Habsburg hereditary lands were largely successful in religiously purifying his demesnes, leaving the Austrian Emperors thereafter with much greater control within their hereditary power base— although Hungary was never successfully re-Catholicized—but one much reduced in population and economic might while less vigorous and weakened as a nation-state."
Also, what does "demesnes" mean - is it some specific Austrian term? 85.179.0.148 (talk) 19:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  overlong sentences 

message: Great Britain was also multinational. (Irish Scottish English etc...) English suppressed their language and culture.
The other multinational state was France. Only 50% of population of France was French in 1850. The local identities of these ethnic minorities were stronger than french identity in 1870 yet. These minority languages based on different grammar and words. They weren't closer to french than Italian or Spanish language. French nationalism and forced assimilation grew the ratio of French mother tongue and identity from 50% to 91% in 1900.  
Russian Empire was similarly multiethnic country too.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.114.153 (talk) 12:18, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Austria-Hungary was not the only multinational state in 1867

message: The external links are linking to irrelevant sites, possibly phishing sites. Can anyone confirm that the links are not heading to the correct location? If you can confirm this, a revision seems most prudent.
--Eichermacher (talk) 18:09, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Since this is an article about Austria, and not for instance the Holy Roman Empire, I suggest that we prioritise people's titles and dates as rulers of Austria, since their other titles and dates may be different. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 02:03, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology 

message: Hello,
I propose two changes to the article's lead:
1. "from 1156 an independent duchy (later archduchy) ..."
2. "as a dual monarchy with Hungary"
Best
Edward Kitaju (talk) 02:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems reasonable - done. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 03:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead 

message: Given how long this article is, I cannot believe how short the WWI section is.  Not even a link to main article.  I was looking for information on the allied occupation of Austria, guess I will have to look elsewhere. SpinningSpark 18:03, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  World War One 

message: Under the section "Anschluss and unification with Germany (1938–1945)" the comment is made "With a Nazi administration already in place and the country integrated into the Third Reich as so-called Ostmark, a referendum on 10 April approved of the annexation with a majority of 99.73%." This has been used in post war victor's propaganda to establish the general guilt of the Austrian population, however the article fails to mention that it was by no means a secret ballot and any voter voting against annexation risked being shot. Nevertheless some brave souls did vote against it. The ultimate source for this interpretation appears to be Shirer, who despite his presence during some events is unreliable on many matters of interpretation, except the Holocaust where he is a renowned source. But see p429 which contradicts much of what he says later about Austrian complicity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jafdip (talk • contribs) 07:36, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of Austria. 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/20130114152521/http://www.geologie.ac.at/RockyAustria/rocky_austria.htm to http://www.geologie.ac.at/RockyAustria/rocky_austria.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071009113141/http://www.wagna.at/flaviasolva/sites/flavia2.html to http://www.wagna.at/flaviasolva/sites/flavia2.html
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) 14:42, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion