Talk:German

message: I would need help with expanding 2006 German troops controversy. Thanks. --Striver 21:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Help

message: I would strongly suggest that featuring Nazism as a possible meaning of "German" is a bad piece of POV. 84.0.216.199 12:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevance of Nazism in this article

message: I've repeatedly proposed a pruning down of this page to only the most relevant entries, which was several times reverted by User:R9tgokunks (). Let me explain once more:
As per WP:DAB and WP:MOSDAB, only pages with titles whose names could seriously be confused with each other should be linked to from disambiguation pages. The test is: if a person enters "German" in the searchbox, or if an editor decides to link to "German" from another article, is there a chance that they really expect to land at article "X"?
Cases:
*the variants of the German language: not relevant. If you want to go to the Austrian German article, you'll type "Austrian German". If you type "German", you want German language as a whole.
*Same for the various national and sub-national groups: Saxons, Bavarians, etc. These are hyponyms of "German", not synonyms. If you want "Saxon", you'll type "Saxon".
*Germanic culture - is plain wrong here
*German nationality law, Demographics of Germany - these are pages that can be linked to from the main article German people or Germany etc. They contain some explanation of what "German" means in different contexts, but they are not what a person expects to find when typing "German" in the searchbox.
*Germany - linked to twice, redundantly
*Placenames: 
**Germantown is not called "German". It only has "German" as part of its name. Not confusable.
**German Language Village Waldse (camp) - totally irrelevant, misspelled, article doesn't exist; probably a spam addition.
*Terminology explanation ("Archaic and incorrect usage synonymously with Germanic or Germanic peoples in English translations of ancient Latin text, as English either lacked an appropriate translation or has a very confusing homonym"): POV ("incorrect"), not precise enough (confusion doesn't hold only in translations from Latin), too long, textually incomplete without the table that R9tgokunks removed in his latest edit (); plus it contains further wiki links unrelated to the disambiguation. Dab pages should not have any non-dab links. This can be handled much more briefly.
*"See also" section: swamped with loosely associated links that are in no way confusable. In most cases, readers will understand how these are supposedly related to "German" only after they've read the articles (Nemec, Deitsch, Gothic, etc.). Therefore, nothing that helps readers navigate from here.
Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with your assessment.  In its current state, it's hardly a disambiguation page anymore.  The entire "See also" section is contradictory to WP:MOSDAB guidelines for that section.  Andrwsc 06:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Terse is better. when it comes to DAB pages. Prefer version 119252972 timestamped  12:31 UTC, 31 March 2007 to 119200456 timestamped  04:03 UTC, 31 March 2007. The editor of the earlier version seems inclined to think of a DAB as a place to deposit a link to all things German, no matter how faint the association may be. In contrast, a DAB is specifically for documenting the multiple articles associated with a particular letter pattern that a user is likely to type into a search box, and to furnish links to every article which may directly associate with the letter pattern. If other editors agree with my interpretation of the disambiguation page guideline, then they may share my questioning of the first bullet point on the page: The Federal Republic of Germany. That is for the Germany disambiguation page, intended for that letter pattern. I think all the links in the entire See also section ought to be redistributed to the various articles, mainly to further the aim of terseness. A disambiguation page is a necessary inconvenience arising from the sad fact that particular letter pattern may associate with more than one article, so editors are compelled to ask users to pick one among various likely links, when users would rather go directly to a target. That's why a DAB must be short to fit on a screen that may have as low a resolution as 640x480 — old computers are still in use — and unconfusing. It should simply offer users a simple choice of alternate destinations. Any more than that is overkill. Take care. — Gosgood 15:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

text: This page continues to be a mess.  It is a disambiguation page, people!  It is supposed to help people who type "German" in the search box.  It is not supposed to define terms, include synonyms or related terms, include definitions or embellishment of terms, include references and footnotes, etc.  Please read MOS:DAB for guidelines.  Andrwsc 20:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Further: take a look at Italian and French, similar kinds of disambiguation pages.  That's what this one should look like too.  Andrwsc 21:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC: Pruning down 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Tysk. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 3#Tysk until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 08:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Tysk" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: What do you mean by your reason "Maybe, but it's not a valid entry"? The term "Germans" refers to ethnic Germans and the citizens of Germany. What is your problem with the addition of "citizens of Germany" in the "Common uses" section?--LeftiePete (talk) 23:32, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The German nationality law should be sufficient.--LeftiePete (talk) 00:00, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citizens