Talk:Lea Rosh

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Name[edit]

In 1998, Rosh proved that here birth name was in fact "Edith Rosh", not "Rohs" as sometimes asserted. She therefore had only her first name changed, not her last name. cf. [1], [2] --85.180.130.221 19:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bullshit removed: She tried to sue all people who made reports of her name change, and still publicly denies that she has changed her name, although it is proved by legal records. - Facts are: She never denied having her first name changed. She in fact sued people who made false reports of her last name changed, which is just and equitable. These two things must not be mixed up. --85.180.179.73 01:24, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Musical Show[edit]

At the moment, she is completing a libretto for the musical show There's No Business Like Shoah Business, which is to be performed in 2006 at the Theater des Westens in Berlin. Removed, since there is no proof to be found for this story, which is most presumably a hoax. The alleged composer of the project, Wolfgang Rihm is no composer of Musicals at all, which makes the story even more untrustworthy. --85.180.130.221 19:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

JEW[edit]

If she is Jewish you should add this to the article--80.230.210.254 22:50, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

She is not. --FordPrefect42 23:06, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
She only pretends to be. Catholic from Berlin 17:41, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In fact she never did. --FordPrefect42 07:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
She want people to believe it and tries to make the impression by changing her name to a Jewish sounding name. In German, there is a word for this: Namensschwindler (usually such ridiculous people adopt "noble-sounding" names to make the impression they are nobles). Catholic from Berlin 13:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please cite the sources for your claims. As to my knowledge she has never been unclear about the fact that she is not jewish. --FordPrefect42 13:59, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Even the German Wikipedia state that "Spätere Berichte über ihre „Namensänderung“ zu einem jüdisch klingenden Namen versuchte sie zunächst gerichtlich zu verbieten, verlor ihre Klage jedoch. In Zeitungsberichten bestreitet sie die Namensänderungen gleichwohl noch in Gegendarstellungen." It is irrelevant whether she says she is Jewish or not, the purpose of the name is to make an impression. Ms. Edith Rohs aka "Lea Rosh" has been widely criticized for this in German press. Even representatives of the Jewish community are very critical because she is abusing them for her "Selbstinszenierung". Catholic from Berlin 14:02, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is out of question that she has changed her first name(s). She has proven though that she never had changed her last name. Now please end this edit-war and stop vandalising the article. --FordPrefect42 14:07, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Important would be to find the source of the courtcase to see if the "jewishsounding" or just the namechange was the issue in the libel action. Agathoclea 14:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An article at Berliner Zeitung states that she never changed her surname. It mentions furthermore that her grandfather was Jewish. So it is just wrong that she isn't Jewish at all. (Of course, according to religious rules it would be correct, but it is likely never understood that way.) --85.180.250.53 (talk) 23:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poorly sourced or unsourced criticism[edit]

Inline citations are essential for information in a BLP that carries a negative tone. The section beginning "When at the monument's dedication..." and ending "...Rabbi Chaim Rozwaski told Rosh to 'Leave the Jews in peace—the dead and the living'" does not indicate its source. If it is sourced to one of the existing articles, please add a note to that effect, or, if not, provide an inline citation indicating where it does come from. If it doesn't indicate its source, it will need to be removed per WP:BLP. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sources added. The story is well-documented. The quote from Rabbi Rozwaski however reads quite different in the original version from the way it was cited here earlier. --FordPrefect42 (talk) 17:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. As I don't speak (or read) German, I can't track these down myself. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
for the critical voices, I did some clean up. Rosh is a controversial figure and has received high ranking appreciation of her work. --Polentario (talk) 03:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not a very good job, I am afraid. Not a single source given in the highly controversial "criticism" section. I am sorry, I had to revert that. --FordPrefect42 (talk) 23:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

??? I am sure you not even read my entry. I mentioned Eike geisel and Hendryk Broder and Claude Leggewie as well Jörg Laus famous Zeit article about Roshs. You have not reverted my similar entries in the German version. The previous version is clumsy and not very clear. --Polentario (talk) 11:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rosh has been accused of exploiting the German Vergangenheitsbewältigung and the troubled conscience of her countryfellows to promote herself and her career. Author Henryk M. Broder claimed that the Holocaust Mahnmal she lobbied for did mainly served to promote the person Lea Rosh and her unlimited vanities, the latter being confirmed - among others - by Peter Eisenman.

various entries in german newspapers, try "eitelkeit" and rosh on google

While being an atheist and not at all member of a jewish community, Rosh is dedicated to represent victims of all kinds. Her name change is an interesting paradoxon - the first name Lea she uses is sounding somewhat Sephardim but Edith, her original name was fashionable with German jews in the early 20th century, as for Edith Stein.

Thats from Eike geisel, in "Triumpgh des Guten Willens"

Critics speak of her pretending the victims role on the public stage, a victimizing approach, which doesnt fit at all with Rosh stamina, rethorical power, boosted journalistic career and actual role as a well known German political celebrity. Claus Leggewie described her as a strong personality, which overwhelmed any German resistance against "her" monument and leaving all those which had put some reasonable points againts her monumental project derided of nerves, voice, reputation and good faith.

↑ http://www.nzz.ch/2001/08/09/fe/article7K8NT.html , Schalten Sie nicht ab! Gedenkstätten in der Ökonomie der Aufmerksamkeit Claus Leggewie / Erik Meyer, 9. August 2001,Neue Zürcher Zeitung

Claus Leggewie, Erik Meyer: "Ein Ort, an den man gerne geht". Das Holocaust-Mahnmal und die deutsche Geschichtspolitik nach 1989. Carl Hanser Verlag, München 2005. Jörg Lau assumes that Rosh has not been able to cope with her own success. Her Guerrilla style PR actions were being based on a withdrawal syndrome - Rosh still trying to restart the debate that made her celebrity. She seems not to realize that it is now done and over with the monument established as big acknowledged and even international success and architectural highlight of Berlin.

In German: http://www.zeit.de/2003/46/Spitze_46 The original description is Krawallaktion To collect money and public interest for her monument project, Rosh e.g. had used highly controversial means as Benetton campaign style controversial posters using the slogan "the holocaust never existed" and 0190 premium rate phone numbers (which are a synonyme for Phone sex in Germany). Not being irritated by any of the public controversies she had caused before, during the monument's dedication on May 10 2005, Rosh held up a molar which she had retrieved from Belzec concentration camp in 1988, She threatened to have the molar embedded in a column at the newbuilt memorial to provide it with a certain authenticity.

See leggewie

The act lead again to a public outrage but Rosh was not to be stopped till Paul Spiegel himself, the then chairman of the Central Council of Jews in Germany condemmed the idea as "irreverent". Rosh further and sudden attempt to stop a involvement of Degussa, which had provided an anti graffiti agent for the monument due to the involvement of one of the former Degussa companies Degesch in the holocaust could have left the whole project in ruins resprectively beyond all cost targets. Rosh received several high ranking orders and prices but had been excluded of any decisive role in the construction of the monument afterwards.

Rosh is a controversial & highly decorated German celebrity. The Holocaust memorial was based on her initiative but is not longer in her hands. Leggewie's book about "her memprial" has received high approvals from different sides. http://www.taz.de/index.php?id=archivseite&dig=2005/07/30/a0266

Source must be cited in the article, that's why your edits had to be reverted. See Wikipedia:Citing sources. --FordPrefect42 (talk) 18:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Must note - I asked for a discussion, what u did is just push revert button- -Polentario (talk) 20:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not only did you add new unsourced allegations, you also removed what was already properly sourced in previous versions of the article. I am sorry to say this, but that behaviour comes close to vandalism. The style guide for citing sources is quite clear, but you do not respect ist - there is no basis for a discussion until you do. --FordPrefect42 (talk) 20:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

whats riding you and why are u telling Plain Bullshit now? --Polentario (talk) 20:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Watch your language! --FordPrefect42 (talk) 21:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As said you dont react or cooperate, you just bully around. Plain Bullshit, as said. --Polentario (talk) 13:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is you who does not cooperate or comply to the simple rules of citing sources properly. And again: watch your language!!! --FordPrefect42 (talk) 17:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have the impression that you behave differentyl on the german and english website. You just push the revert butto and protect a personal property. This annoys and i dont see any reason nt to call a male cow a bull. BR --Polentario (talk) 02:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lea Rosh. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:20, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lea Rosh. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:44, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence Fragment[edit]

The lede contains this sentence fragment:

While she received major public awards, e.g. the Bundesverdienstkreuz, Rosh is either a controversial and influential figure in the local political scene of Berlin.

Given the "either," I have to wonder where is the "or" that should follow? She is either a controversial figure in the local political scene or what? The sentence could be repaired by removing the "either," but I assume someone put it there for a reason. Would anyone care to address this?

Alternatively, could someone have been saying she is also a controversial figure? I have no way to know, but I hope someone who knows her better than I do can clarify the sentence one way or another.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 14:33, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lea_Rosh&oldid=1216000116"