Talk:New states of Germany

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

Aritcle name[edit]

Stupid name: new laender

first word english [new], second german [laender]- why not de:Neue Bundesländer or ??

ciao--Ot 06:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Neue Bundesländer isn't often used in English. However New Länder does seem to be more often used than New Laender, so I'd propose moving to the former. Any objections? --Delirium 09:41, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As no objections surfaced, I've made the move. --Delirium 23:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
IMO according to the general guideline to use English, it should be called "New states" or if that's ambiguous "German new states". I'm not sure which term is used more in English; there are about 5 times as many Google hits for {germany "new states"} as for {"new länder"}, but these results are inconclusive since the former might catch lots not related to Germany (e.g. the first hit is about Yugoslavia). Hairy Dude (talk) 18:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I would suggest a move to new federal states (or New Federal States?), with new states and neue Länder as redirects. Using Google searches (adding "Germany" to exclude German sources), new federal states gets 23k hits [1], while neue Länder gets 11k [2]. New Laender gets 21k [3], which is only slightly less than new federal states, but WP guidelines would suggest a preference for something less linguistically mangled. Rd232 talk 23:18, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You asked for an opinion so here is one- and as this is a request- I feel totally free to be outrageous. None of the suggestions above makes any sense. If I were looking for information on the Neue Länder- I would look in a dictionary not a encyclopedia! If I persisted I would goto de:wiki, and read it in the original. The concept is just too parochially German to feature in an English article. I may click on the language link and find the English page- and read it to check the translation. Imagine the target reader- what would they search for? German Lands in former East Germany? Would they know that the plural of Land is Länder? May they think that they are looking for a region? German regions in former East Germany? ClemRutter (talk) 17:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well obviously the article isn't aimed at people who don't enough about the topic to find it. (I'm not sure how many WP articles are.) Nor is it aimed at German speakers... this is English WP. But people may come across it wikilinked from elsewhere. Or they may come across the term (or one of the various synonyms which redirect here) and want a definition. Rd232 talk 21:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, there are no refences in the article for the use of the concept under any term in English. As far as I know, most English works just refer to the region as the "former East Germany" or "eastern Germany" (both including Berlin/East Berlin), and as such are covered by several other article on en.wiki. However, if reliable sources can be found for the use of an English language term that is the direct equivilent of the German term in meaning, then the article should be at that title, per the guidelines. Otherwise, the article should probably be at the German language title, since the use of the German term is what the article is actually descibing. That would be either Neue Bundesländer or Neue Länder, whichever title an English reader would be more likey to see. If that can't be determined clearly, then the de.wiki title, Neue Bundesländer, would be the best one to use. - BillCJ (talk) 18:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed it's not the most common reference to the area - but it's common enough for an article, I think: eg a shade under 2k hits on Google Scholar for "new federal states"+Germany [4], a shade over for New Laender [5]. "Neue Bundeslände" gets on 300 English-language hits [6]. Rd232 talk 21:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with others who have queried the validity of this article on what is obviously a back-translation. In Anglophone countries the term would be simple "former (states of) East Germany". For an example look at this BBC new item. IMHO an alternative name to "New Länder" is needed somewhere near the top. BuzzWoof (talk) 15:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That link doesn't refer to the constituent states of the former East Germany. I take it that was your point. But there are occasions where people can and should refer to the present-day institutions, the 5 states on the territory of the former East Germany. As illustrated above, "New Laender" is sometimes used and should be mentioned, but should it be the article name? Rd232 talk 17:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, if for formal reasons it's important to retain the article name, so be it. But what about making a mention in the opening paragraph to the fact that these states are commonly called "former (states of) East Germany" BuzzWoof (talk) 09:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a single common phrase along those lines? isn't it usually just "former East Germany"? Which I've just made a redirect here, but on reflection maybe it should be moved there. Rd232 talk 13:27, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's a good idea to solve it with a redirect, and as there is no uniform phrase I've just set up a redirect here: Former States of East Germany. Despite that, lots of people would come here without redirecting, so imho some mention should be made. And as BillCJ says above: most English works just refer to the region as the "former East Germany" or "eastern Germany" BuzzWoof (talk) 08:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was New Länder → New federal states of Germany — (or just New federal states): it's fully in English, returns a similar number of GHITS once you remove Wiki results, ([7] [8]) it's used by der Spiegel [9], BBC [10], NYT [11] and by the German government [12] --Nero the second (talk) 11:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moving to New federal states after four days without a comment.--Nero the second (talk) 09:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Neutral Point of View[edit]

I just checked this article out from the talk page. I've never been to Germany so I don't know so much about it, but the article seems kind of one sided. Isn't there anything nice to say about former East Germany? Kitfoxxe (talk) 12:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For instance this sentence: "A 2004 poll found that 25% of West Germans and 12% of East Germans wished reunification had not happened.[1]" Why doesn't it say that 75% and 88% do like it, rather then mentioning the negative? (I guess some were undecided, but still.)Kitfoxxe (talk) 22:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because 12% is what the reference says, I can't just make up a figure to make it look more positive. Also, I don't think Deutsche Welle would ever portray Germany in a negative light without a reason. IMO there's plenty of good stuff on the subject, just see transportation and economy. The only part of the article that I believe biased is the one about politics, because the NPD is not that important politically, yet most of the section is about it.--Nero the second (talk) 17:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I reacted to this too; it seems strange that 80-90% of the "Politics" section should be devoted to the far right. Lampman (talk) 22:11, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article name - 2[edit]

The states of Germany are called states (Länder), not federal states. The discussion on the article name some years ago apparently didn't really reach a conclusion, except some doubts over whether this article is justified at all, because "most English works just refer to the region as the "former East Germany" or "eastern Germany"" as one editor said. Urban XII (talk) 13:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First, I don't see how the discussion dates back "some years ago" since the last comments were left in April. Second, the article was substantially expanded and rewritten (yes, by me) since. Third, how did you skip this?--Nero the second (talk) 14:40, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unlike the previous discussion, no one commented on your proposal then, probably because you can't expect people to constantly keep watch on low importance articles and check this talk page every day (the discussion only lasted for four days). I was already aware of your opinion. You have not yet explained why you insist on "federal states" when even the main article on States of Germany explains why the proper term is "state", not "federal state". Also, your claim that the German Wikipedia refers to them as Neue Bundesländer is wrong, the German Wikipedia uses both terms. However, the correct one should be given preference. The previous discussion in which more than one editor took part didn't reach a conclusion, but the point made by one editor that "New states" (or "New federal states" or other variations) is not the usual term in English when referring to the former East Germany as a modern geographical area is in my opinion correct. This is mainly German, not English, usage. Urban XII (talk) 19:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I proved the contrary, here. Also, the German WP article is called de:Neue Bundesländer and that's a fact.--Nero the second (talk) 06:07, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move - 2[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:39, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New states of Germany → New federal states — which is the name the article had until yesterday. It's used by major media outlets such as it's used by der Spiegel [13], BBC [14], NYT [15] and by the German government [16].--Nero the second (talk) 06:32, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. There is no such thing as "federal states" in Germany. They are called States of Germany. The fact that some media outlets have occasionally used the term "new federal states" does not prove that it is a) correct and b) the most frequently used term in English. In fact, as one editor pointed out above, the area is probably most frequently referred to as the "former East Germany" or "eastern Germany". This article was originally called New Länder, for several years, until Nero moved it recently. If we are to use a title based on German usage rather than English, we should at least use the correct term (which is Land/state), as the previous title did, and as the current (New states of Germany) also does. Urban XII (talk) 11:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"new states" is far more ambiguous than "new federal states", and again since you are German (or at least understand German) you should know that in colloquial usage Bundesländer, which is usually translated as "federal states", is far more common, and the most common name is the relevant one under WP policy.--Nero the second (talk) 13:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not German. I doubt that any of these expressions are "the most common name" in English. The most common name in English is former East Germany. Besides, the formally correct term is more relevant in an encyclopedia than colloquial usage when both terms are widely used, as they in fact are (it's not like Neue Länder is not used). Bundesregierung.de uses the term "Neue Länder" 2 130 times, and "Neue Bundesländer" only 448 times, and "neuen ländern" 9 420 times and "neuen bundesländern" 4 830 times. I.e., the correct term is preferred in official usage. Urban XII (talk) 13:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(Neue Länder = new states), (Neue Bundesländer = new states of the federal Republik = neue Länder des Bundes; genitive case of posession--Cum Deo (talk) 02:04, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"neue länder" is susceptible to many false positives, as it is used in many contexts where it is unrelated to germany, it is often used to refer to the new states of the EU for one.Nero the second (talk) 14:05, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In German, the term "Neue Länder" predominantly refers to five German states. New EU members are usually referred to as "neue Mitgliedstaaten der EU" or similar expressions. In English, the expression New states of Germany of course leaves no doubt. Urban XII (talk) 17:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I really can't support moving the article to such a generic title as "New federal states." New states of what? Claiming that people should already know what name to look for is backwards. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 13:07, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
New federal states of Germany is fine for me.--Nero the second (talk) 13:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually Germany does not have Bundesländer as has Austria, but the Grundgesetz call it Länder. However, the expression Neue Länder or Neue Bundesländer is an expression which was coined in 1990 to describe the five states which entered into the Federal Republic of Germany. New federal states isn't wronger than New states of Germany. The Term Neue Bundesländer would be more correct, even an abbreviation was commonly used 20 years back, NBL. --Matthiasb (talk) 13:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm aware of that, but that is predominantly a German term and not an English one. I also note that Neue Länder is also a common expression (the German article lists them as equivalent), and of the two, only Länder is correct, because Germany has no entities called Bundesländer. I think "Former East Germany" would be the best title in the English language Wikipedia. Urban XII (talk) 13:16, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It would, but it also would be in German.--Nero the second (talk) 13:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose move to anything which does not include "Germany" in the title.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose anything that includes the expression "federal state" which is not a correct term (States of Germany) nor the most common term in English in this case (former East Germany probably is the most common term). I don't really care whether we call it Neue Länder, New states of Germany, Former East Germany or Eastern Germany. Urban XII (talk) 17:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • The proposed (and former) title is ambiguous; in English, the United States, Switzerland, and Argentina are federal states - it would be unusual to call Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, even though technically a member of a federation, a federal state. Oppose; I see nothing much wrong with the new title, or even with New Laender. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is not the Wikipedia of Germany, so the requested title makes no sense unless you are only concerned with Germany. 65.94.252.195 (talk) 05:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Former East German states" or "Former East Germany" would make the topic clear to English speakers. Are these expressions offensive in some way? Kitfoxxe (talk) 17:21, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose to call them "Former East Germany" or "Former East German states".

  • at first, because they weren't states in East Germany. they were more like departments in other borders.
  • at second, the germans try to avoid to use terms like "East Germany" or "West Germany" because there is still a wall in their minds. Its the reason why the call these states "Neue Bundesländer" ("new states").--Cum Deo (talk) 01:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually former East Germany suggests the areas east of the Oder river, which are today Poland. Geographically the former GDR ist Middle Germany. --Matthiasb (talk) 17:51, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I dont think so - these "suggested" areas are called (former) eastern Prussia--Cum Deo (talk) 02:35, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, Mathiasb is right on this, "former East Germany" is ambiguous and which of the former East Germanies is meant can only be concluded from the context. Skäpperöd (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok.. hm. In fact, Germans would call the area behind the Oder river (former) eastern Prussia, because Germany and The German Reich aren't the same. And they would say "(former) East Germany" if they mean former GDR. Otherwise by the Expression "former East Germany" they would suggest "GDR". But they prefer to call them "neue (Bundes)länder", which can only be translated by "new states (of the Federal Republic (of Germany))". Or do you mean the eastern areas in the Weimar Republic and later in the Third Reich? This may be ambiguous. But as I know Hitler called these territories "Gotenland" or so. Ok, its the german point of view - as I know it. --Cum Deo (talk) 22:08, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your claims are complete nonsense. What does "because Germany and The German Reich aren't the same" mean? Germany is Germany, a nation-state founded in 1871 that exists to this day (at least last time I checked). Germans would never refer to historical eastern Germany as "eastern Prussia" (East Prussia was only one of several regions of eastern Germany). Urban XII (talk) 03:57, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Move to "Germany's eastern Länder after the reunification". "Neue (Bundes-)länder" (new Länder) is not that common and just one of many terms in use to refer to the area now, the most common being afaik "der Osten" (the East, ambiguous) and "ehemalige DDR" (former GDR). Since all of these terms are descriptive, we should use whatever is most precise and unambiguous. I also want to emphasize that this article's scope is not the new/eastern länder, which are pretty heterogeneous and have dedicated articles, but only common features (=problems) of these länder resulting from the GDR era and the subsequent unification process. Skäpperöd (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose My Langenscheidt Muret-Sanders dictionary (the biggest in their range?) translates die neuen Bundesländer as "the newly-formed German states". So I propose we leave the title as it is or (since "of Germany" in this instance is something of a Wikipedia affectation) use the Langenscheidt translation - Newly-formed German states or the more succinct version of New German states. Both exclude "federal", but include "German". --Bermicourt (talk) 17:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The current title is quite ok. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Loosmark (talk) 18:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Regarding the Far right[edit]

I see no reason for this section to be here, however perhaps It could be moved to the NDP party page. Also Calling them Neo-Nazi is purely ignorant. Considering that they do not directly denounce democracy and their few economic polices seem more third way then national socialistic. So it would be appropriate to call them nationalists or ultra-nationalists instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onthehook (talk • contribs) 02:51, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


It seems that some one edited it back to Neo-Nazi. Now I don't want to get into a edit war so if it is edited again I will make no attempt to fix it. However I would like to know why it was edited back to it's original stance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onthehook (talk • contribs) 22:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wierd title[edit]

Sorry, I'm no expert on German history, but this seems a very strange title. At first reading the title seems to me to imply that these states were not previously in Germany. But I'm not aware of any territory being transferred from Poland or Czechoslovakia (as it then would be) at or around the time of the reunification of Germany.

The article suggests that these states were previously in East Germany, which surely was always 'of Germany'. But the very first line describes them as 're-established states', which suggests that it not the state that is new. So what exactly does the new apply to?.

-- Starbois (talk) 16:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"new" relative to the "old" states of the former West Germany. The term is less common in English, it's standard in German. Rd232 talk 20:50, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


REUNIFICATION WITH AUSTRIA Austria becoming the 17th state of Germany will be much easier. Income per head in Austria is similar to the Western Länder. Already 40% of Austrian Trade takes place with Germany. Both share the same currency (Euro) and thanks to Schengen there are no borders...So, Austria will become the 17th member state of "Deutscheland" in a short period of time.--83.44.104.125 (talk) 02:33, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What? --98.207.194.150 (talk) 11:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Depopulation[edit]

This section is not correct and needs work: e.g. "About 1.7 million people have left the new federal states since the fall of the Berlin Wall, or 12% of the population. A disproportionately high number of them were women under 35." That is only half of the story: Almost 3 million people moved from East Germany to West Germany and about 1 million moved from West Germany to East Germany or returned after years. So the balance might be 1.7 million people. Because of those who are moving from West Germany to East Germany is a higher percentage of older citizen and men, it appears as a result that less younger women are left in East Germany.

"Around 300,000 homes have been demolished in recent years. In parts of eastern Germany, wolves and lynx have reappeared after many decades." Both facts are true, but there is no connection in between. The population of lynx is due to very strong affords in nature protection, reintroduction programmes and the establishment of National Parks. The return of wolves can be rather associated with the fact of a greater number of abandoned military training areas where they found a home.--Zarbi1 (talk) 09:58, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on New states of Germany. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on New states of Germany. 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) 19:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 12 July 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. It looks like there's appetite to move the page, but no agreement on what the new title should be. I suggest trying a new discussion for one of the other suggested titles. (non-admin closure) Celia Homeford (talk) 10:38, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New states of Germany → New Länder – the original name of the artikle was right, Länder is the official name used by the government in english as well. also there is a difference between a state and a land, so calling it states is misleading Norschweden (talk) 15:47, 12 July 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:01, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • We don't always go by the official name but the name used in used most often in reliable sources. Please see WP:COMMONNAME as well as WP:OFFICIALNAMES. I don't know enough on the subject to know what the best name is but I do believe a stronger case for changing the title is needed.--76.65.40.44 (talk) 20:53, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Call me WP:ASTONISHed – under this title, I expected a dull article about formation, territory and demographics of five new states, and instead there is a comprehensive overview of Eastern German society, politics, culture, demographic development and so on. Call me neutral about the proposed move, but this really needs an all-encompasing descriptive title such as Eastern Germany after reunification. No such user (talk) 11:52, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to Eastern Germany, which already redirects here. A page about the region should use a regional name. The page isn't focused on the re-unification period, which I would expect from the title. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:32, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose move as OP suggests, and not crazy about "Eastern Germany" either. Definitely possible that a different title might be better, though. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:42, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Atheism[edit]

There are other reasons for not having a stated religion than atheism. For one thing, when the social pressure to attend church eases off due to changes in attitudes, and populations no longer have to be outwardly observant, they generally stop going to church in any significant numbers. Another factor often overlooked is the rise of the Welfare State: no longer reliant on churches to look after them when they are old or unwell, previously devout congregations tend to let their attendance lapse. Other (mostly invisible) social forces, such as people becoming interested in folk or "fringe" religions, or religions that are not formally organised, may make an impression on demographics of faith, without there being an easily recognised cause. Nuttyskin (talk) 20:18, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_states_of_Germany&oldid=1201183347"