Talk:Heinrich Himmler

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Heinrich Himmler article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
Sign your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · newspapers · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4

Heinrich Himmler has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 18, 2011	Good article nominee	Not listed
July 16, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

Heinrich Himmler has been listed as a level-4 vital article in People. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as GA-Class.

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Biography / Military / Politics and Government

(Rated GA-class)

	Biography portal v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (marked as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (marked as High-importance).

WikiProject Germany

(Rated GA-class, High-importance)

	Germany portal v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Munich (marked as High-importance).

WikiProject Bavaria

(Rated GA-class, High-importance)

	v t e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bavaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bavaria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Military history

(Rated GA-Class)

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.

GA

This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Additional information...

Associated task forces (general topics):
	Military biography task force
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
Associated task forces (periods and conflicts):
	World War I task force (1914–1918)
	World War II task force (1939–1945)

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on May 23, 2017 and May 23, 2020.

Grammatical Changes to Himmler Lead[edit]

Beyond My Ken Would you mind elaborating as to why my recent changes are "not improvements"? If there is any prospect of reaching a middle ground through consensus, you have to give me a little more to go on. Emiya1980 (talk) 04:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Your changes said the same thing in more words. Nick-D (talk) 04:57, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

And in more simplistic words. We are not Simple English Wikipedia. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nick-D: @Beyond My Ken: I can understand the need for conciseness but "simplistic words"? Are you saying I should avoid using simple but otherwise grammatically correct language EVEN IF nothing is lost in terms of the information being conveyed? Isn't the purpose of Wikipedia to make its content accessible to its viewers? Emiya1980(talk) 09:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I am saying that if a passage makes sense, is well written and grammatically correct, changing it to use simpler words and to meet what I would characterize as a "high school" standard of writing does not improve Wikipedia, For those who cannot understand our level of presentation, Simple English Wikipedia exists. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Frankly, as someone who was an English major in college it was just not an improvement. Making something "accessible" doesn't mean it should not be well written. Especially, one that has been rated a GA article, as it is held to a higher standard. Kierzek (talk) 11:20, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Adding a word to even up the margins like you did here is a futile exercise. My monitor is ten inches wide (I am using a Chromebook). The desktop computers in my house have 21" wide monitors. Different monitors will display the prose differently. So it's a pointless edit. — Diannaa (talk) 14:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Kierzek: While I understand the reasoning given for reversing some of my edits (i.e.conciseness, futility of trying to even up margins), simply saying my grammar is poor without further explanation gives me very little frame of reference (See WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT). Previously, you said that you took issue with how my edits resulted in the removal of information from the lead but my latest edits have done nothing of the sort.

One of my recent edits consisted of solely adding the word "also" after "he" in the seventh sentence of the second paragraph so it would read as follows:

"He also controlled the Waffen-SS, the military branch of the SS."

Without my change or something similar, the sentence as it currently stands is a non sequitur. It has no connection with the preceding sentence nor does it contain an introductory phrase signifying a change of topic within the paragraph (as in the 4^th, 6^th, and 8^th sentences). How exactly does my edit make it worse? Emiya1980 (talk) 18:26, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Emiya1980, I suggest you read Pleonasm. Kierzek (talk) 19:31, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Kierzek: If conciseness is your chief concern, what's the problem with combining the seventh question with the second so it reads as follows?:

Over the next 16 years, he developed the SS from a mere 290-man battalion into a million-strong paramilitary group including a military branch (i.e.the Waffen-SS) , and set up and controlled the Nazi concentration camps.

Granted that would result in a slightly longer sentence. However, isn't that better than shoe-horning in an extra sentence about the Waffen-SS near the paragraph's end that doesn't fit within the surrounding context? Emiya1980 (talk) 20:46, 23 August 2020

Assuming that my writing is not up to the job, can we at least agree that the current version of the text has a problem in need of correction? Emiya1980 (talk) 20:43, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

No, I do not agree with that. I think you're finding a problem where there is none. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:39, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree with BMK that it does not need tweaking. Kierzek (talk) 23:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Quote attribution[edit]

At the moment, this article has the following quote:

Himmler believed that a major task of the SS should be "acting as the vanguard in overcoming Christianity and restoring a 'Germanic' way of living" as part of preparations for the coming conflict between "humans and subhumans".

This is cited to Longerich 2012, p. 265. However, who is being quoted here? Longerich or Himmler? This needs to be made crystal clear to readers. :bloodofox: (talk) 05:04, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Himmler would never put scare quotes around "Germanic" so it must be Longerich. I'll make it explicit. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:20, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for checking that. I wasn't sure if this was a translation issue or what (deutsch, germanisch, etc.). :bloodofox: (talk) 06:28, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

The doctor that examined Himmler before he bit the suicide pill[edit]

The doctor who examined Himmler was Dr Wells, who was a GP from Kineton in Warwickshire.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.100.71.202 (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Could be, but (1) A citation from a reliable source wou]d be needed to add that to the article, and (2) it's a pretty trivial bit of information, so shouldn't be added per WP:UNDUE. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:29, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Search This Blog

anhduc wiki 4