Talk:Kristallnacht
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] query
Would it be possible to link to other competitors to encourage users to do their own fact-checking and research?
MONkeys exist its true yes i no this is shocking but take it all in.
LA la la la la laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.213.21.218 (talk) 16:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Did Jews pay reparations for Kristallnacht?
Did the Jewish community have to pay 1 billion Mark to the state for the economic damage that the Kristallnacht had caused? Goering and Hitler said that the Jews were responsible for the Kristallnacht. I read that somewhere. Andries 04:45, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Shirer (The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich), chapter 13, has a cite for this; it was a fine decided by a meeting presided over by Goering on November 12:
- "...they were subjected, collectively, to a fine of one billion marks as punishment, as Goering put it, "for their abominable crimes, etc."". Shimgray 02:46, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Pogrom?
Is pogrom the proper word since pogrom etymologically postdates the event? Smkatz 01:12, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- see pogrom; Russian word in use from at least 1880 67.118.119.175 20:49, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
By coincidence, I just watched a documentary on the History channel which covered Kristallnacht. The documentary played contemporary newsreels from English language services, and showed headlines from English language newspapers, and they were at that time using the word "pogrom", so in that sense it it is justified. I agree, though, to my American ear, "pogrom" sounds like russians and cossacks, not Nazis.
Contemporary newsreels may have used the term "pogrom" because that was the only thing that they could compare it to, that their viewers, in 1938, would relate to. 130.13.15.134 (talk) 21:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)John Paul Parks130.13.15.134 (talk) 21:01, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Inconsistency
I just noticed that in the article Racial policy of Nazi Germany it states that, after the Kristallnacht, "Approximately 100 Jews were killed, and another 20,000 sent to the newly formed concentration camps." whereas Kristallnacht says "More than 30,000 Jews were arrested and taken to concentration camps;..." So does anyone know the actual figure of Jews sent to the concentration camps after the Kristallnacht?
- The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (chapter 13) quotes a Nov.11 SS report as saying "20,000 Jews were arrested. 36 [Jewish] deaths were reported, and those seriously injured were also numbered at 36." Shirer then notes that the ultimate number of deaths "is believed to have been several times the preliminary figures", but does not cite another number. Shimgray 02:35, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Walter Pehle in "Die Judenpogrom 1938, Klee 1990" says that 30,000 Jews were taken - arrested is surely the wrong word - and sent to the concentration camps. He wrote that it was not possible for him to say how many of them actually survived. Lost in space 18:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
I noticed the same inconsistency regarding the number of Jewish men taken to concentration camps, in the article, History of the Jews in Germany. In these matters, it is necessary to be as accurate as possible. Failure to be accurate plays into the hands of the "holocaust deniers," who may claim that the figures are just made up out of thin air. So, this inconsistency needs to be resolved.
130.13.15.134 (talk) 20:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)John Paul Parks130.13.15.134 (talk) 20:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The Name
...The actual name was "Reichskristallnacht". Now it is also called 'Pogrom' or "Reichskristallnacht" but if you say the last you sign "" with your fingers, as it was the nazi-propaganda name.
Don't really know how to start a discussion about the name about this article, but I will try. The real name is 'Pogromnacht'. The term 'Reichskristallnacht' is nazi-propaganda, because this name suggests something beautiful or romantic. I will try to translate it: the empire's night of the crystals. As you can see, they said 'crystal' instead of 'glass'. I am a German pupil and we talked about this article at school. We came to the conclusion that it is false to use this name. I do not know if this is an argument you can use, but I think the name of this article should be changed to 'Pogrom' or 'Pogromnacht'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.173.250.149 (talk • contribs)
- I have added a note that "Reichskristallnacht" is a Nazi term. I don't think the name of the article should be changed, because "Kristallnacht" is the most widely used term for the event. ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thank you, I have joined the English Wikipedia now. The 'Terminology' is correct now.
-
-
- Sorry, it's not. The above statement by user 81.173.250.149 is completely false. 'Kristallnacht:' was the term originally coined by the population and it was and to some degree is still the term used in scientific literature. 'Reichskristallnacht' came in use later after the war as a mockery for the Nazi's propensity to add 'Reich' to everything. It was named 'Kristallnacht' because of the broken shop windows that were made of 'Kristallglas' (crystal glass), i. e. very expensive high quality glass used for shop windows, not for windows in residential homes. So 'Kristallnacht' implies nothing romantic and was no invention of the Nazis. Pogromnacht was coined even later because the connection between Kristall(glas) and the broken shop windows was somehow lost. 141.13.8.14 17:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- According to the German Wikipedia article, it was exactly the other way round. The term Reichskristallnacht was coined in Berlin as a sarcasm (it was only sarcastic because of the Reichs- prefix), but later adopted by the Nazis. The term Kristallnacht (without the Reichs-) is a post-1945 term. Personally, I never encountered it at all before I read it in Wikipedia, I had only known Reichskristallnacht. -- 213.47.127.75 14:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Reevaluation of vom Rath
I have read that vom Rath has not died on November 7. but two days later, (9. November) in hospital. If this is truth, then sentence On Monday, November 7, Grynszpan shot and killed vom Rath. needs to be corrected.
More important, I’ve read, or heard (alas, I can’t remember where) that Grynszpan’s target wasn’t vom Rath, but some other German official – he missed, and accidentally shot vom Rath.
To make things even more ironic, vom Rath was accused of being a friend of Jews, and he was on the black list of Gestapo. Gestapo actually planed to execute him, but they found his assassination most convenient (another evidence that pogrom was orchestrated). I’m not sure, but I think that he did used to help Jews. -- Obradović Goran (talk 15:36, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
To further this line of inquiry into the vom Rath assassination, I watched a documentary on the History channel (I watched a few, I think this one was specifically about Nazi physicians), and it suggested that vom Rath had been listed in stable condition in the Paris hospital, and that he did not die till he was under transport back to Germany. That the people transporting him were top ranked Nazis including Hitler's personal physician, led to the documentary strongly suggesting that his death was actually more convenient for the Nazis, and they left dangling the possiblity that it had been at the Nazis hands. Anybody know if this can be verified?
[edit] please make this section more clear
"The persecution and economic damage done to German Jews did not stop with the pogrom, even as their places of businesses were ransacked. They were also forced to pay a collective fine of 1 billion marks to the Nazi government. This was a bit of irony--as even the New York Times had photographic proof at around the same time that the Nazis were at least partially responsible, although now we know that it was approved by Hitler, and that Hitler was involved in the planning of it. This was arguably a form of collective punishment, later denounced in the Geneva Conventions."
Were at least partially responsible for what? I understand that you it most likely means the kristallnacht, but considering the article for the past paragraphs has no mention whatsoever of them Blaming this event on the Jewish people In fact the rest of the article makes it seem more like it was the Germans fault. Thus it makes everything a bit confusing and there needs to be clarification as to the initial reaction of who was to blame for the event.
- Odd, I don't see that language in the article. Can you tell me what section it is in? --Goodoldpolonius2 19:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Wording
What is meant by the phrase "the common people"? It sounds rather elitist. Does it mean the common Jews, or the common Germans? Who is a common person? Are you? It implies that somebody else, some other group, was better than "the common people". Admittedly this should not be the case, but through usage over decades "common" has become a denigration. Proskauer 10:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Precious Buildings? There is a lot of POV in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.162.77.10 (talk) 12:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Drastic rewrite
The article was almost entirely rewritten by 139.168.112.176 (talk · contribs) today. Much of the prose, refs and images that editors worked on for months and years is now gone. Now it reads more like an essay than an encyclopedic article. Is it possible to integrate both old and new text without loss of much content? I think so. ←Humus sapiens ну? 07:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I chose to completely rewrite this article to simply increase the volume of information available within the article. I used the Wikipedia article as a source of information, but I found it occasionally contradicted by accounts published by historians, which made it difficult for me to integrate the two. I do not have the time nor the computer skills to integrate my response with the response given, so I chose to replace it almost entirely with the article that I had written, except for parts not covered. I do not believe that any vital information present in the previous article has been lost. You are correct in saying it reads like an essay; that is exactly what it is. My aim was to make a far greater amount of information available than was previously, and I hope that other users will edit my essay to improve readability, cross-linkage and so on.
Yours Sincerely, 139.168.112.176
- Thank you for your contributions. I found that it's not bad. I made an attempt at integration and make it into an enclyclopedic article. Please doublecheck and consider joining the project. Yours. ←Humus sapiens ну? 08:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Terminology section
Does anyone have sources for the terminology section; and would it be okay if I were to move it closer to the end? The terminology aspect is not important compared to the rest and shouldn't lead the article. SlimVirgin (talk) 10:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
The last paragraph of the terminology section appears to mix up, or possibly use interchangeably, the words 'Kristallnacht' and 'Reichskristallnacht'. It should be clarified; I have placed the {{cleanup}} tag above this paragraph. Digwuren 08:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Jewish Economic Boycott
I'm surprised this article doesn't mention anything about the Jewish Economic Boycott of 1933. I know that in Germany at the time, this boycott of 'worldwide Jewrey' was cited as a reason for the Kristallnacht. I'm not saying that this was caused because of the boycott, but I think some mention should be made of it in the article. Some people on Wikipedia have accused me of being a white-nationalists so I do not feel comfortable making the edits myself (I'm afraid that people who hold a grudge on me will revert my edits) but I think the information should be included here. I did a quick google search and found this: http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/jdecwar.html thanks :) Sup dudes?[[User:Kitler005]] 22:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps the boycott deserves its own article, but I fail to see a relation to Kristallnacht. And the article you gave is tendentious and outlandish to say the least (I am trying to be polite). The world Jewry declared war on Germany and the Germans merely resisted, yeah right. ←Humus sapiens ну? 22:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- I didn't realy look over the article, it was just the first one google returned. I know the claims of the Germans at the time seem silly now, but even if it was only used inside of Germany as an excuse, shouldn't it still be mentioned? I can't find anything on wikipedia about the boycott either :( I can understand how a little thing like that could get over looked, but in most of my history books it is mentioned. Thanks for the fast comment :)Sup dudes?[[User:Kitler005]] 22:58, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I have found the following links that may prove useful to this subject; http://www.ajhs.org/publications/chapters/chapter.cfm?documentID=230 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/Black.html
-
Hope this helps :)Sup dudes?[[User:Kitler005]] 23:15, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image of Eberswalde synagogue on fire
Can someone authenticate this: [1]. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens ну? 22:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] For some reason
I see all the crowds out near College Avenue, happy that Rutgers University has pulled off a Battle of Tsushima against Louisville, and see them tearing up newspapers, hurling fireworks, shaking signs, and tp'ing the place, and I suddenly think of Kristallnacht (ok, "November Mischief Night", but the date is a bit TOO eerie a coincidence.) I have a dirty mind, don't I? 204.52.215.107 06:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- Let's keep Talk pages for what they are supposed to be used: improve articles. Thanks. ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Civilian participation not clear
Many historians agree in the fact that Germany civil participation was minimal, that the fact that SA and SS agents were dressed like civilians confused all the population, and that is the reason of the confusion whether or not civilian participated in that event.
Please recheck it, cause in the beginning you stated that mainly all the problems were started by SA & SS agents, and later on you talk about massive civilian participation
[edit] jewish
im a jewish citizen in new jersy and my school is curently studing about the rein of hitler. i was assigned to do a report on kristallnacht. my school has also been watching this movie callled paper clips. great movie to watch when studying about hitler. my grandma and grandpa are holicost survivour from a concentration camp and no people who survived too. this is a subject not to be taken lightly. nor is the rien of hitler. i am gald he was stoped for if he wasn't i would be here writting this email. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.36.0.181 (talk) 21:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC).
[edit] concentration camp?
Was there really a Polish concentration camp for Jews in Zbaszyn, as mentioned in the text? Isn't it offensive? http://www.history-of-the-holocaust.org/LIBARC/LEXICON/LexEntry/Zbaszyn.html describe the situation quite differently; cf also Grynszpan and Ringelblum in Wikipedia. Accidental visitor 89.76.167.110 22:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] minor point
"He attempted and missed three additional shots." from the vom Roth assassination attempt section doesn't make any grammatical sense...I'm not very sure about the context so could somebody with more knowledge clean this up? ie, he attempted to do what? missed three additional shots against whom? huhLittlekorean 05:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Section called "Terminology"
This section, as it stands today, August 4, 2007:
- Reads like a first draft: that is, somebody just sat down and typed it out of the top of their head.
- Is conversational in style, and therefore un-encyclopedic.
- Has no citations at all, so the reader doesn't know if any of it is true or not.
- Uses present-day terms, such as "politically correct"
The article as a whole should have perhaps one or two sentences explaining the origin of the term. See the opening section for Night of the Long Knives. Most books that deal with Kristallnacht do not spend four or five paragraphs just discussing the term Kristallnacht and how it is or isn't now politically correct.
Also, all of what the original author of this section says might be true, but maybe it's just not. You can't really tell, can you, because it is not verifiable. "Verifiable" means:
- Any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source.
- Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed.
The section on terminology should be edited with an eye towards succinctness and relevance.--Mcattell 23:36, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Modern Response
The section "Modern Response" is really just a "Kristallnacht in popular culture" section and does not belong in this article. The fact that a "German metal band" (or any modern band, for that matter) dedicated a song about Kristallnacht is outside the scope of the event.--Mcattell 00:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Use of Terms
First of all two variations of the spelling anti-semitic/antisemitic are used.
Worse still under the Kristallnacht section the "Night of the Long Knives" is referred to as an act of anti-semitism. Last I checked Ernst Rohm wasn't Jewish nor was the SA. As the NOTLK was, in fact, an action against the SA it is borderline stupidity to call the Night of the Long Knives an act of anti-semitism. To do so simply ignores the very real and complex social conditions, DETAILED BY THIS VERY ARTICLE, that led to the downfall of the SA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.145.82.117 (talk) 17:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] important citation
Re the extremely important sentence in the entry,
...Hermann Göring said: "The Jewish problem will reach its solution if, in any time soon, we will be drawn into war beyond our border—than it is obvious that we will have to manage a final account with the Jews."
Is that cited, as given in the reference previous, in Gilbert, Kristallnacht 2006?
If so, I think that citation should be moved, or repeated and given an ibid and page number if possible.
Shlishke (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Spotlight
This page is being collaborated upon by the Wikipedia spotlight, and will be until Friday 23rd May. The article will change on Saturday. If you want to help, join us in our IRC channel to collaborate. Next week's article is Thirty Years' War...... Dendodge .. TalkHelp 00:22, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Translation from German
I can translate from the German article that is featured. But as usual inline citations are rare in German, what would lead to a loss of B class status if none provides cites. So I would like to know if I should do this(or perhaps only translate specific section or topics)? Wandalstouring (talk) 16:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Feel free to translate it, I'm sure we can easily find sources. A google search for
kristallnacht -site:en.wikipedia.org
gives 570,000 results...... Dendodge .. TalkHelp 16:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] GA-Passed
Congratulations-You have passed the GA review. Only things that I see could be revised as are follows.
- Lead section could be expanded.
- The large space under Global Response should be fixed, possibly by adding more text.
Cheers, ṜέđṃάяķvюĨїήīṣŢ Drop me a lineReview Me! 02:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Spotlight early closing
It is our unwritten guideline that any GA or FA cannot be a spotlight article, unless it faces delisting imminently. Therefore, when this got promoted we moved on. I just thought I'd explain so you didn't just think we got bored...... Dendodge .. TalkHelp 20:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)