Talk:Anne Frank/Archive 2

message: I've heard her name was really pronounced Ann-uh (Anna), so why does everyone call her Anne as in Ah-N.
:Anne Frank was German born, and in the German language any word with an "e" on the end of it is pronounced in the same manner as an English word with an "a" on the end of it.  Therefore in German (and Dutch) "Anne" is pronounced "Anna".  Rossrs 08:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation

message: Somehow, I don't think it's appropriate to go through all of wikipedia and claim that every German who the Nazi regime persecuted, and revoked the citizenship of, is not "German". Even worse, it's possibly a modern day justification of the Rootless_cosmopolitan and Wandering Jew libels. Ronabop 05:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Stateless" is probably a correct term, but it is kind of redundant as all European Jews could have been considered stateless as their nationalities were stripped from them (temporarily and illegally) during the advance of Nazism.  The article says she was born in Germany and that she fled to The Netherlands so we have all the information available to us.  If it's a thorny issue would it not be better to just saying "was a Jewish girl" etc, rather than continue reverting?  Rossrs 14:21, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: She was born German and died "stateless".  This appears to be a form of revisionism. --Viriditas 01:01, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

text: She did speak fluent German - she needed to because her mother was not confident speaking Dutch.  German was spoken in the home and it was only while in hiding that Mrs Frank made a concerted effort to speak Dutch.  Anne and Margot spoke Dutch to each other, and German to their parents and the van Pels couple.  Mrs van Pels also spoke very little Dutch - this is all in the diary.  Anne Frank chose not to speak German if she did not need to, which is another thing altogether. This is a very minor point though.   I also think your comment about an American born in Germany etc... is a very poor analogy which bears no resemblance at all to Anne Frank's situation.  Rossrs 13:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

text: What we think is offensive is irrelevant.  You are engaging in revisionism.  Anne Frank was born in Germany and raised there for the first four years of her life.  I find it very strange that you think a four-year old child hated Germany and Germans. According to holocaust-history.org, "There are photographs of the family that show the comfortable, normal and happy life they led there surrounded by many friends.  The Frank sisters grew up speaking German and playing with Catholic, Protestant and Jewish children.  The Frank family expected to live their lives in Frankfurt as Otto Frank's family had done for generations but conditions of life in Germany were changing." --Viriditas 11:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For the purposes of an encyclopedic article, the intent in the opening sentence is to reflect how a person was born.  Then it can be clarified or qualified with additional information where necessary.  She was born German.  She was just as much a German Jew as every other Jewish person born in Germany before or since.  Her nationality was stripped from her as it was from every other Jew in Europe during the course of the Holocaust.  The Germans saying she was "not German", did not make her "not German".  The stripping of her nationality was illegal and was part of the War Crime that was perpetrated against her.  True,  the diary is full of references whereby Anne Frank expressed a mixture of emotions towards Germany and Germans, most of them negative, and she did not identify as a German.  She identified as Dutch - but this does not make her a Dutch Jew however, as I'm sure you'd agree.  She was a German Jew in exile in The Netherlands.  To me this is far more correct that using the word "stateless".  I also agree that what we consider to be personally offensive is not relevant - if that's part of your argument for using the term "stateless" then it could not possibly be a more wrong reason.  Rossrs 13:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted back to "German" for the reasons stated above.  This has been reverted several times in the last couple of days and I have become the 4th person to take this viewpoint, the others being SlimVirgin, Viriditas and Ronabop.   This is a venue that depends on consensus and you have presented your opinion at some length without swaying the consensus of opinion.  Therefore, although there is likely to be further talk on this subject, it is not appropriate for you to continue reverting.   Please feel free to make whatever comments you want, but please do not revert again.  Rossrs 13:55, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

text: This makes sense. I fixed it. ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of her being "German"

message: In 1986, a critical edition of the diary was published . It compared her original entries with her father's edited versions, and included discussion relating its authentication, and historical information relating to the family.
Since the link is bad I can't tell if its a denial or an authentication, or yet something else. I'd say giving the conclusions it reached are very important if it's going to be.
yeah i agree but the fact that the book opens up the fact that people all over the world were being persicuted because of their race it still happens today.
:This edition included entries that Otto Frank had previously censored, as Anne had said some mean things about her mother and others.  He saw it as being in bad taste to publish them, though the entire diary was later published in 1986.  I don't know if that was what you were asking, though... Michael 03:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I need to explain something here. Anne got a diary for her birthday and began writing in it just for herself. Then she heard about the possibilities of diaries like hers being published after the war, so she began to rewrite herself to make her story understandable and presentable to outsiders. When she died, her father used these two different versions of the diary to create a published version and changed most of the names, as many of the people mentioned were still living. He also did some minor editing. So to answer the question about the critical edition, it has as much of the three versions of the diary as could be found, so they can be compared or read independently, or whatever the reader wishes. It also has the remainder of Anne's writings, and other important historic information relating to Anne. It has been updated since its original publication. I think my version is from the 1990's. Celedor15 21:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What's this 1986 "version"? 

message: I have created a new article List of references to Anne Frank in popular culture and have moved the entire section from this article.  I have a couple of reasons.  First the article itself is quite large, and while the story of Anne Frank is for the most part, told, the references to her will continue, and as they do the list will grow.  I foresee it eventually dominating the article, and this would be wrong.  I also feel that some of the references are not appropriate for this article.  For example, we have Frank's place in history discussed by such notables as Elie Wiesel and Nelson Mandela and in the same article we have a throwaway line from a Winona Ryder character, Hilary Duff in an SNL skit, the inane and offensive line from "Angela" in My So Called Life and the brain dead Karl Pilkington revealing his lack of knowledge along with his lack of humour.  These are not earth shattering moments in the understanding of Anne Frank - most of them are throwaway references that will be forgotten next week, let alone next year.  I think they cheapen the article.   I can see a place for them though, just not here.  Hence the new article. Rossrs 09:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I support splitting this section off due to article size, but not for your other reasons.  Notice, I have renamed the article to conform with other articles in :Category:In popular culture.  —Viriditas | Talk 09:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. Size was the main problem.   Rossrs 20:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Anne Frank references in popular culture

message: Following comments above I have started re-referencing the page to allow for the inclusion of specific information such as page numbers to allow verification.  This is something I've been thinking about for a while and have changed the references for some other articles that I have contributed to, and for which I feel somewhat responsible for (having been the one who added the references in the first place).  I have found that it is a time consuming task and to try to do it all in one edit in previous articles has resulted in edit conflicts.  Therefore I will gradually and systematically fix the references for this article as my time permits.  I realize that having two different edit styles within one article is not appropriate, but I ask that other users understand that I am working on it and to accept the two reference types for the time that I'm working on it.  Rossrs 00:16, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to say, I think this is really great that someone is looking after this.  When doing recent change patrolling, I see suspicious, subtle and strange changes in articles which, since they are quite random, I often don't know enough about to check directly.  If nobody responds when such problems are identified, proper references are the only reasonable way to check.  That's why I was suggesting content removal before (it's better not to say anything than to say the wrong thing) and I now don't need to.  Mozzerati 22:00, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Referencing of article