Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Nazi Germany

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

No consensus to promote at this time - Zawed (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 07:20, 26 January 2019 (UTC) numb« Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Nazi Germany

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): White Shadows (talk) Diannaa (talk) Kierzek (talk)

This has been a project several editors have contributed to, most notably @Diannaa: and @Kierzek:. Since being promoted to GA-status, there has been an effort underway to improve the article to the point that it can be brought to FAC in the near-future. The editors involved mutually agreed it would be best to take it to ACR first however, to get input from the community before we take things to FAC (especially in light of the sentitive topic, the importance of this article, and the fact that millions of people view this page on a yearly basis). There need be little explanation what this article is, or the subject matter. Nazi Germany is quite well-known and studied throughout history. If any questions or comments arise regarding the scope and depth of this article, please do not hesitate to ask. Due to article length guidelines and the sheer scope Nazi Germany entails, this article is supposed to give an overview of the entity which ruled Germany from 1933 to 1945.

Note: Please keep in mind, Diannaa, Kierzek, and myself have been collaborating on improving this article, and using Diannaa's talk page as the hub for communication between one another, but by no means does this mean us three alone should get the credit for improving this article should it pass. Several editors have contributed to this article over the years. I've just included us three as the nominators due to the collaboration we each agreed upon to get it to ACR.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 22:56, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

All of the maps but the first, and several of the images, would benefit from being scaled upY Done

File%3ANational_anthem_of_Nazi_Germany%2C_Horst_Wessel_Lied.oga: composition needs a US PD tag

File:German_Reich_1942.png: what is the source of the data presented in this map? Same with File:Greater_German_Reich_NS_Administration_1944_Variant.png, File:Weimar_Republic_states_map.svg

File:Nazi_Germany.svg is tagged as disputed

File:German_Autobahn_1936_1939.jpg: where/when was this first published? Same with File:The_Bochnia_massacre_German-occupied_Poland_1939.jpg

File:1933-may-10-berlin-book-burning.JPG needs a US PD tag, and if the author is unknown how do we know they died over 70 years ago? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- File:National anthem of Nazi Germany, Horst Wessel Lied.oga: I have added a {PD-1996} tag
- File:German_Reich_1942.png: I have asked the image creator (Beyond My Ken) for more information. Update: Beyond My Ken says he didn't create the map; it's a derivative work of a map by User:Director, who appears to have left the project. I can get you data and sources as to when each polity was incorporated into the Reich if that's what you're looking for, but I need to be sure first that the work is necessary, as I expect it would take several hours. Alternatively, we could move File:Greater German Reich NS Administration 1944 Variant.png to the info box, since I can source it to Kershaw 2008. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:18, 24 September 2018 (UTC) Update: there's a map in Kershaw The End (2011) p.19 that is similar. It shows as of July 1944 the Nazis holding France, Belg, Neth, Lux, Germany, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Montenegro, Albania, Greece, Crete, northern Italy, and part of Russia. It doesn't go all the way to the Crimea because they'd lost that territory by July 44. It does not distinguish by status (incorporated, General-Govt, civilian administration, etc). — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:14, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Greater German Reich NS Administration 1944 Variant.png: I have asked the most recent person to amend the map for information. The creator of the map is no longer active. This map was not present when the article passed GA review in 2013. Update: A version of this map appears in Kershaw (2008) Hitler pp. xx-xxi.
- File:Weimar Republic states map.svg: I have asked the creator of the map, but he may not know, as he derived it from another map on the Commons. This map was not present when the article passed GA review.
- File:Nazi Germany.svg: I have removed the map after reading the discussion at commons:File talk:Nazi Germany.png.
- File:German_Autobahn_1936_1939.jpg: the Library of Congress states the image was created/published between 1936 and 1939 and that the image has no known restrictions.
- File:The_Bochnia_massacre_German-occupied_Poland_1939.jpg: I have no way of answering with certainty, other than to state that the earliest publication mentioned on the file description page is 1957.
- File:1933-may-10-berlin-book-burning.JPG: the source at the USHMM states it's a still from a Nazi propaganda film held at NARA. However such seized documents do not automatically fall into the public domain. I have replaced with File:Bundesarchiv Bild 102-14597, Berlin, Opernplatz, Bücherverbrennung.jpg — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:04, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Nick-D It's great to see this article at ACR, and it's in excellent shape. I have the following comments:

The coverage of the Nazis rise to power in the 'Background' section seems a bit brief. In particular, it doesn't note the role of violence and lawlessness in the Nazis' rise to power, a point emphasised by Evans.Y Added
Say what the Sturmabteilung was the first time its mentionedY
"In the following months" - as the previous para (quite rightly) jumps ahead, a date here would be helpfulY
"This meant the only non-political institutions not under control of the NSDAP were the army and the churches" - this is unclear, as the Army was under control of the Nazi government. Also, many officers and rank and file supported the Nazis.Y Evans states this, but it's obviously incorrect, so removed.
"An additional 20,000 died in the land campaign" - which land campaign is being referred to here?Y I can't access the 1960 yearbook to confirm what it means. I think this may overlap with the Battle of Berlin, so removing.
Rather than call out civilian deaths in the Battle of Berlin, it would be better to discuss the scale of civilian deaths on the eastern front during 1945 as a whole given that they were far higherY Removed detail about Battle of Berlin, but not adding material regarding the Eastern Front in this paragraph, which is discussion casualties in Germany itself.
The para on mass suicides should discuss what motivated them. Kershaw's book The End covers this issue in detail.Y Added
"Himmler envisioned the SS as being an elite group of guards, Hitler's last line of defence" - how it ended up (a large and often low quality force which was frequently involved in war crimes) should be noted.Y Added
The "Reich economics" section doesn't really capture how unsustainable the Nazis' economic policies were (a major argument made by Tooze).Y added some
Picking up on another point made by Tooze and recent historians, the section also doesn't cover the considerable extent to which the Nazis economic and industrial policies damaged Germany's war effort (duplication of effort in multiple fields, over-ambitious, badly run and ill-conceived weapons programs, being too late in starting the shift to a total war economy, etc) I read most of the book and added what I could. "too late in starting the shift to a total war economy": no, Tooze emphasises throughout that they were short of raw materials throughout the war. - D
The article presents the clergy as being unified in their opposition to the regime, which I don't think is correct –N Reply I'm seeing where the article demonstrates that the regime was opposed to pretty much all the churches, but I'm not seeing where it claims that all the churches opposed the regime.
"Hitler favoured the music of Richard Wagner, especially pieces based on Germanic myths and heroic stories and attended the Bayreuth Festival each year from 1933" - I presume he stopped doing this at some stage during the war?Y fixed
The article doesn't really discuss how public attitudes towards the regime, including active resistance, evolved over Nazi Germany. Evans and Kershaw argue that it probably only had majority support for a minority of its existence, and Hitler had become irrelevant to most Germans by 1945. The resistance movements in the foreign service, intelligence service and military were significant, and after the Western Allies crossed the Rhine in 1945 most troops and civilians were keen to surrender. Y 500 words added on the resistance and added a bit in a couple of spots about deteriorating support for Hitler and the regime. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:46, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The large scale of the post-war trials and de-Nazisation process could be made more clear.Y done
The coverage of how the Nazi era is remembered in Germany and influences its government and society could be expanded a bit, given it seems quite profound on the basis of my visits to the country. Nick-D (talk) 05:28, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Y done[reply]
- Replies above by Diannaa. I will have to bring Tooze in on inter-library loan. There's a copy over at the U of A so this shouldn't take long. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:22, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply from Kierzek as to Waffen-SS. Kierzek (talk) 02:41, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I added as much as I could find from Tooze on these topics. It's not the sort of material one can look up in the index. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:56, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Indy beetle

A word or two on the formation of the Weimar Republic, and how it was presided over by a series of unstable coalition governments that worsened as time went on would be helpful.Y
As the Free City of Danzig was a separate entity from Poland, it should be made explicit that it was annexed by Germany.Y
The display or use of Nazi symbolism such as flags, swastikas or greetings is illegal in Germany and Austria[449][450] and other restrictions, mainly on public display, apply in various countries. The rest of this sentence needs a cite.Y unsourced part removed; will look for sourcing.
Study of the era and a willingness to critically examine its mistakes has led to the development of a strong democracy in today's Germany, but with lingering undercurrents of antisemitism and neo-Nazi thought. A phrase less time-relative than "today's" would be helpful.Y removed the word "today's"

-Indy beetle (talk) 04:39, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replies from Diannaa. Will finish later — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:04, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reply from Kierzek, as to Weimar Republic add. Kierzek (talk) 02:39, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I've given an extensive enough review to be in a place where I can offer my support, but I can affirm that all of my comments have been addressed. -Indy beetle (talk) 00:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from PM

Wow, great to see a level-4 vital article being nominated. I'm very impressed that this has been taken on. I will post some observations over the next few days once I've read it through a couple more times, but have to say from my initial read that it is already in great shape. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

I think there needs to be something in the lead about the way in which Germany dominated its neighbours and erstwhile partners economically in the lead-up to war, as well as the exploitation of puppet states and occupied territories for raw materials, food, manufactured goods and labour.

This is something I (White Shadows) agree with for sure. I'm just curious how we think we should word this? I'm thinking something like "The Nazi regime worked to impose economic and military dependency upon its neighbors in the lead-up to the war, and exploited the raw materials, agricultural, industrial, and labour output of occupied territories and allies alike throughout the war." That may be a poorly worded way to get those points across however, which is why I'd like to solicit input before making any article changes on this.
I (Kierzek) like the basic ideas conveyed. "The Nazi regime dominated both neighbours through military threats and partners economically in the years leading up to war. After the war commenced, Germany exploited the raw materials, agricultural, industrial, and labour of occupied territories and allies alike."

done. - had to split it to fit properly.

I note that the lead is already over MOS:LEADLENGTH, but I think five paras is ok for a subject of this importance and complexity.

Wholeheartedly agree there!

"and his word became above all laws" is a bit inelegant. Perhaps "and his word became the highest law."?

Y done.

suggest "and also as the master race"

Can I ask where you meant for this to be added? I'll put it in as soon as I can see where it's supposed to go.

instead of "and were therefore viewed as the master race"

Y done.

given various definitions of what is or isn't included in the Holocaust and the need to include other atrocities besides the Holocaust such as Aktion T4, the murder of Soviet POWs etc, perhaps "were murdered in the Holocaust, war crimes and other crimes against humanity."

Y done.

there is a bit of a flow issue and repetition between paras 3 and 4, in terms of the killing of Jews and other undesirables. I think the racism as a regime feature should be in para 3, along with a mention of the early concentration camps, but believe the Holocaust and other killings should be in para 4. This progression would show the increasing brutality of the regime as time went on, from detaining political prisoners to wholesale extermination.Y done.

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:10, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nazi concentration camps is overlinked, as is Allies of WWII

Two replies above by me.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 13:28, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Replies, as to lead. Kierzek (talk) Kierzek (talk) 00:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Background

I did a fairly minor c/e
suggest "Germany was known as the Weimar Republic during the years 1919 to 1933"

Y done.

hyperinflation is overlinked

Y done.

I think you could dispense with the note and give the original German for NSDAP in a lang template ie ({{lang-de|Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei}}, NSDAP, Nazi Party) as it is germane to the initialisation of NSDAP, and not providing it begs the questions of what it is an initialisation for

Y done.

suggest stating explicitly that the NSDAP was founded in 1920, then say the DAP was founded a year earlier

Y done.

I'm sure I'm parsing this too finely, but instead of "removal of the Weimar Republic", suggest "the destruction of the Weimar Republic"

Y done.

I think it would be worth adding a bit explaining how the NSDAP were going to improve Germany's international reputation, as it begs the question

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:50, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few of the easier edits right now. I plan on getting to the rest later today when I have more time.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 14:38, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Incorporated suggestions as to NSDAP and DAP, accordingly. Kierzek (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nazi seizure of power

I think it would flow better if the sentence beginning "Violent suppression..." was the last sentence of that para, as the decree was on the following day, so the SA actions seem out of chronological order

Done

Worth adding that there was significant intimidation of non-Nazi members of the Reichstag by the SA for the passing of the Enabling Act

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:23, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Please let me know if you'd like more elaboration.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 17:57, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nazification of Germany

suggest "Nazi-led coalitions if that is correct

Done

I was a bit confused with the use of Reichskommissar in regard to the German states. My knowledge of them was that they were civil governors over occupied territories, and I wasn't familiar with the use of the title prior to the war until I did a bit of digging. I was wondering if it might be worth mentioning that this position later became Reichsstatthalter and link?

Maybe I am just overly tired tonight, but I don't see Reichskommissar mentioned. I do know that Reichsstatthalter is an older term and I believe the correct one for use in Germany proper. We could link it to where the words "Reich Commissars" are used. Childers only uses the word "Reich commissars" and talks about them being "dispatched" on 5 March to 9 March 1933 to all German states not already under Nazi control. Kierzek (talk) 01:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:22, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting suggestion. I'd like to see what the other editors think about it before I make any changes here, but I'm personally not opposed to doing so.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 17:58, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Consolidation of power

Given it was an attack on the NSDAP's own paramilitary wing, it sort of begs the question of who was responsible for carrying out the Night of the Long Knives. Suggest it is worth introducing the SS and Gestapo here as the main perpetrators.

Y done.

Worth including Goebbels title as Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda?

Done

I think it would be useful to state that the Nuremberg Laws denied basic human rights to both Jews and Romani people, and resulted in their exclusion from wider German society, and led in many cases to their pauperisation.

The article does state that they were extended to the Romani people later on. If that's not sufficient, I'll include them here as well.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 01:39, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about the Jews being dehumanised themselves, more that they became ostracised and dehumanised in the eyes of many German people due to the enforcement of the Nuremberg Laws?

Y done.

was state authority really expanded? I thought the Reich became centralised and the states were stripped of their powers?

Y done. Tweak per Childers with cite.

I'd say that the Nazi centralization effort of stripping Germany's states of their powers and establishing a unitary state run from Berlin went hand-in-hand with an expansion of state authority. I don't think there's any debate among historians that state authority in Germany was dramatically expanded under the Nazis, to the point that Nazi Germany is often portrayed as one of the ultimate dystopias in world history.

I meant the existing Lander (states), not the central government. I don't believe the powers of the Lander were expanded at all, in fact the opposite. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:30, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. Do you want something else tweaked? Kierzek (talk) 01:37, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:54, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. The German states were effectively abolished...having more or less been turned into administrative units of Berlin.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 16:29, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replies above are from me. Love this review Peacemaker!--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 18:05, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replies from me. Kierzek (talk) 01:33, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Military build-up

suggest "Hitler found Germany without allies" → "Germany was without allies, and its military was drastically..."

Done

what German claims on the Balkans are we talking about here?

Done

suggest "95 percent of voters supported Germany's withdrawal" if that is what is meant?

Done

suggest "war in the east should begin in 1942"

Done

suggest "In March 1935, Hitler announced the creation of an air force, and that the Reichswehr would be increased to 550,000 men."

Done

Not just supplies were sent to Spain, but also the aircraft, tanks and their crews. The planes were part of the Condor Legion, as were the tanks, so perhaps just say "The Condor Legion included a range of aircraft and their crews, as well as a tank contingent. The aircraft of the Legion destroyed the city of Guernica in 1937."

Y done.

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:30, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replies from me. I'm a bit confused about that last point however. Are you looking for this to be added, or as a replacement of existing text?--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 16:29, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I took care of it. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 16:42, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Austria and Czechoslovakia

suggest"...March 1939. The Germans split rump Czechoslovakia into two parts, the puppet Slovak Republic and the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia."

Y done.
Poland

all good

Foreign policy

I think Germany's pre-war attempts to achieve economic dominance over its (especially southeastern) neighbours should be emphasised prior to this point, perhaps in a separate subsection. Tooze talks a bit about this, and Paul Hehn's 2005 book A Low, Dishonest Decade gives a good overview too.

I don't have access to Tooze or Hehn at the moment. Perhaps @Diannaa: or @Kierzek: do?--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 01:39, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I ordered Tooze on inter-library loan but it still hasn't arrived. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:00, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad Diannaa you are able to obtain Tooze. I do not have either book available to me. I will work on other ACR points this week. Kierzek (talk) 22:02, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The book was shipped over two weeks ago but still hasn't arrived. The librarian is following up with the sending library to determine what went wrong. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:25, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I found a bit of content on this topic in Tooze but mostly he says that they failed to dominate, so there's not much to say. I added a bit about Romania. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:37, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:57, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the key dates of the expansion of the Tripartite Pact should be included here, eg the dates Hungary, Bulgaria and Romania joined

Done

Outbreak of war

Heydrich was more than head of the Gestapo at this point, he was the head of the SiPo (which included the Gestapo and Kripo) and Sicherheitsdienst, and later in September 1939 he became chief of the Reich Main Security Office

Y done. I tweaked it to state head of the SiPo and SD; and you are correct that he was not chief of the RSHA on 17 Sept. as the RSHA was officially established on 27 September 1939. Kierzek (talk) 14:40, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

was he referring to Polish Jews at this point, or all Jews in occupied countries?

My understanding is that he was referring to all Jews the Nazis could get their hands on.

Y done. He was referring to Polish Jews. Heydrich had already stated on 7 September 1939 that all Polish nobles, clergy, and Jews were to be killed. Kierzek (talk) 22:31, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conquest of Europe

suggest "Against the advice"

Y done.

suggest mentioning Dunkirk at the end of the first para

Done

link Forced labour under German rule during World War II

Y done.

link black market

Y done.

mention of the Greek famine is out of chronological order, this was a common problem in occupied countries, so I would just say "Famine was experienced in many occupied countries during the war" rather than picking of two

Done

suggest linking to London Blitz, Coventry Blitz and Plymouth Blitz instead of the city articles

Done

move the sentence beginning "German efforts..." to the beginning of the para

Done

full stop after Greece

Done

I think that it should be pointed out that Greece and Yugoslavia were broken up between the various Axis powers after their defeat

Done

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:12, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replies by me.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 20:43, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

suggest "Wwest Ukraine"

Y done.

suggest "popularity of the ~~party~~Nazi Party"

Y done.

"Eeastern territorial gains"

Y done.

suggest "survived ~~a bomb attack~~an assassination using a bomb"

Y done, with minor tweak.

I believe Operation Spring Awakening was the final major German offensive of the war.

It was the last German offensive, but arguably not on the same scale and certainly not the same impact. I will tweak the Ardennes Offensive to say, last major German offensive on the western front. How about that? Kierzek (talk) 15:12, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:10, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

say who Eva Braun was ie his girlfriend and then wife

Y done.

suggest replacing "On 4–8 May 1945" with "Between 4 and 8 May 1945"

Y done.

the main template for Mass suicides in 1945 Nazi Germany should be at the beginning of the subsection not in the middle of it

Y done.

regarding expulsions of Germanic people, this was widespread, not just in east-central Europe, but also in southeastern Europe ie Danube Swabians from Yugoslavia and Romania. I think if you said "central, eastern and southeastern Europe" that would cover it in a general sense, which is what we are trying to achieve with this article.

Y done. down to Geography, more to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:53, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replies by me. Kierzek (talk) 13:53, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Geography

consistency with the italicisation of Anschluss throughout

Y done.

the list of invaded countries between 1939 and 1941 is missing Denmark, Norway, Yugoslavia and Greece (the latter two in conjunction with Italy)

Done

You might like to add that Germany also annexed part of northern Yugoslavia in April 1941, the current (though awkwardly titled) article covering this is Slovene Lands in World War II, these territories were annexed to two Reichsgaue, Carinthia and Styria

Done

the Germans occupied the Italian protectorate of Albania (1939–1943) in the 1943 German occupation of Albania, and the Italian governorate of Montenegro which became the German occupied territory of Montenegro
The one occupied territory in Yugoslavia that the Germans retained that is not mentioned is the German occupied territory of Serbia which had a Serb puppet government

Done

You might like to mention that the Germans facilitated the establishment and then propped up the genocidal quasi-protectorate/puppet state on Yugoslav territory, the Independent State of Croatia, and essentially gave large parts of Yugoslavia to Italian Albania, Hungary and Bulgaria to annex

the Independent State of Croatia has been included in the article.

more to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:10, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Politics

the NSDAP didn't "arise" after the outbreak of the Great Depression, it arose from the social and financial upheavals at the end of WWI. It became a mainstream political party at the outbreak of the Great Depression, going from 2.6% of the federal vote in 1928 to 18.25% in 1930. I think it would be worth adding these percentages in at some point, to show it was extremely marginal before the Great Depression.

Y done, with tweak from Evans & Kershaw. Kierzek (talk) 20:08, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

hyphenate Jewish-Bolshevik

Y done.

worth mentioning that the German system of government was replicated in the occupied territories, which also had overlapping and competing fiefdoms, often split between the military command, civilian leadership, economic leadership and SS and Police leadership.
the bit about Rassenschande should be towards the top of the para after fn 211

Y done.

Merriam-Webster includes Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe, but not Kriegsmarine and Heer, so the former probably don't need to be italicised, but I do see a point about being internally consistent within the article.

I agree and it was discussed, but not all agree on this and its seems to be a matter of local article consensus as I find some articles do and others don't (including GA and Class A as to each way) at this point. Kierzek (talk) 14:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Heydrich's 8 July 1941 announcement, like the earlier one I queried regarding Poland, was this only in the Soviet Union, or was it everywhere including Germany? It reads like the latter, but I don't believe that is right.

Y done. He was talking about Poland and especially the newly invaded USSR; so, I changed it to "eastern conquered territories". Kierzek (talk) 13:53, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the bit on Blitzkrieg doesn't really reflect the current academic consensus on whether there really was such a concept in the Wehrmacht. Needs to be harmonised with the Blitzkrieg article, particularly Glantz and notes a and b. Also it was tanks and motorised infantry that did the initial attacks.
the Military and paramilitary subsection doesn't really fit under the Politics section, perhaps it should have its own section?

Done

when talking about the Einsatzgruppen, I suggest stating that they killed more than two million rather than millions, Hilberg is the source for the two million.

Y done.

I think this section needs more about the extent of Nazi sympathies and Nazi Party membership among Wehrmacht higher commanders
I think the bit about the SA needs to make clear that the SA was decapitated soon after the Nazi seizure of power

Y done.

The Night of the Long Knives is covered earlier in the article already. Does it really need to be repeated?

Y done.

the photo caption with the Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler needs to be adjusted to reflect that in 1938 it was not a Panzer division, but was just a motorised infantry regiment

Y done. I believe stating the official name from 1934, forward, is sufficient for the general readers. Okay? Kierzek (talk) 14:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the SA and SS section needs to differentiate between the Allgemeine-SS which had over a quarter of a million members in 1938 and the Waffen-SS which did the fighting alongside the Wehrmacht

That is an overall number. What you may be forgetting is the Leibstandarte and SS-VT were already formed and had members by that time. The Waffen-SS grew out of the SS-VT and did not exist in 1938. Kierzek (talk) 21:24, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

suggest "Himmler initially envisioned the SS"

Y done.

suggest "and losses of Waffen-SS troops"

Y done.

"Reinhard Heydrich" should just be Heydrich at this stage per MOS:SURNAME

Y done.

the Einsatzgruppen info at the end of the section is a repetition of earlier info, perhaps capture any unique info and move it all up to first mention

That addition was done per the request of another reviewer herein and does discuss two different aspects. I moved it up, to group them together, see if that is more in line with your thought. Kierzek (talk) 21:24, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"From 1935 forward, the SS spearheaded the persecution of Jews" is this right? Which part? Are we talking about the Allgemeine-SS or the SD, Gestapo and other police here?

All of the SS branches were involved, some more than others (this includes the Orpo, which were under SS control, but not an official branch of the SS). Kierzek (talk) 21:24, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

more to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:39, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Economy

suggest "created a scheme for deficit financing in May 1933"

Done

"The number of women in paid employment"

Fixed

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:49, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The two above replies are from me.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 00:43, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another round of replies by me!--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 01:39, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Racial policy and eugenics

link National Socialist German Students' League
suggest "Jews were harassed...", given Jews were not citizens after a certain point
I can give you chapter and verse on killing of Roma in occupied Yugoslavia, but given that it was mostly done by the Ustashas rather than the Germans, I don't think it is directly relevant to an article on Nazi Germany. I would remove the Serbia and NDH examples, or if you still want to keep the NDH one, state that estimates are that the Ustashas killed 20,000 out of the estimated 25,000 Roma within the borders of the NDH. If you still want to do that, the citation for those figures is Tomasevich 2001, pp 608–610.

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:35, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

the section on Aktion T4 is also about other persecuted groups, so I'd suggest using the header "Other persecuted groups" rather than just "People with disabilities". Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:59, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Y done. With that said, I don't totally agree with the sub-heading change as the main focus was people with real or perceived disabilities; mental, physical and social. Kierzek (talk) 13:29, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

was the Eastern Front campaign really about the Jews as the great enemy of the German people? I thought it was about Lebensraum, and Generalplan Ost was how Lebensraum would be created once military conquest had been achieved?
The Generalplan Ost section needs a few tweaks, as it appears to conflate Generalplan Ost with the Final Solution. My understanding of Generalplan Ost was that it was about ethnic cleansing Slavs and other non-Aryans (which included Jews) from eastern Europe to make way for German settlers, but this section is currently emphasising actions against Jews in its first sentences. Clearly there were a lot of Jews in eastern Europe and the SS were targeting them regardless, but I would have thought a fair summary of Generalplan Ost was more along the lines of what my understanding is, of being focussed on ethnic cleansing of all non-Aryans? According to my reading of the Generalplan Ost article, Browning states that two days after Barbarossa was launched the Jews were even removed from Generalplan Ost and were dealt with separately. Probably worth checking Browning on this, but I think that given persecution of Jews already has a section plus there is the section on the Holocaust, this section should be about the ethnic cleansing of all non-Aryans from eastern Europe. I'll defer to anyone who knows this stuff better than me (which isn't saying much), but I think this section needs greater focus. Perhaps it could be written in a chronological way to address how the Nazis treated non-Aryans in eastern Europe from 1939 on? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:51, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Holocaust and Final Solution subsection seems very light-on.
I wonder if the Oppression of ethnic Poles info sits better within the GeneralPlan Ost subsection, which talks about what was done to the Poles?

I don't believe so; given what the Poles went through and the losses the nation suffered, I believe they should have their own sub-section. And General Plan Ost covered a wider range of so-called non-Aryans, so to speak. Kierzek (talk) 01:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest "During the course of the war, the Nazis captured 5.75 million Soviet prisoners of war (POWs), more than were captured by the Germans from all the other Allied powers combined."

Y done.

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:22, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Catrìona

I'm not familiar with the literature dealing with Nazi Germany per se, but here are some comments.

During the course of the war, the Nazis captured more Soviet prisoners of war (POWs) than all the other Allied powers combined, with an estimated total of some 5.75 million. This doesn't make sense, but I'm not sure what the intended meaning is.

Rephrased

By 1943 the Waffen-SS could not longer claim to be an elite fighting force.[231] In addition, a third of the Einsatzgruppen members that were responsible for mass murder, were recruited from Waffen-SS personnel.[232] The formations also committed many war crimes against civilians and allied servicemen.[233] It's not clear how the Waffen-SS participation in war crimes is "in addition" to its non-eliteness, and it's unclear that the Waffen-SS units themselves (not just the Einsatzgruppen) committed many war crimes and massacres. Given the small size of the Einsatzgruppen, very few Waffen-SS personnel participated in it; has Waffen-SS participation in the Einsatzgruppen been emphasized in the literature on Waffen-SS criminality? (Tens of thousands were transferred to the SS-Totenkopfverbande and served at various concentration camps, including several thousand at Auschwitz).

One has to read the short overview in context; the one point did not have to do with the other point, but I did tweak it. Kierzek (talk) 14:03, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Holocaust section

It seems odd that this section is significantly shorter than the "Persecution of Jews" section. Is that reflected in RS coverage?

I think it's more from 1) Space constraints, and 2) That many of the details covered in "Persecution of Jews" doesn't need to be repeated in this section. We can obviously add more if this is a problem.

From the first sentence in this section, it seems like this is actually covering the Final Solution and its implementation, rather than the Holocaust as a whole.

Section is supposed to cover both topics. I've also added the words "and Final Solution" to the section title to make that clear, but that may be a change that requires consensus.

Around the time of the failed offensive against Moscow in December 1941, Hitler resolved that the Jews of Europe were to be exterminated immediately. It's not clear that the Einsatzgruppen and others were already murdering Jewish men, women, and children in the Soviet occupied territories. Also, as stated later in this paragraph, the implementation of the Final Solution was not "immediate"; some Jews were kept alive for labor, some of the occupied countries initially refused to deport their Jews, and the Operation Reinhard camps were operational until early/mid 1942.

This should be addressed now, but please let me know if you'd like further changes.

Twelve million were put into forced labour. Twelve million who? This isn't referring to twelve million Jews, but unclear from context. Perhaps move to the forced labor section if that's what this is referring to

Done.

Initially the victims were killed with gas vans or by Einsatzgruppen firing squads, but these methods proved impractical for an operation of this scale. It should be made clear that shooting > gas vans > stationary gas chambers, as a general chronological progression. The Einsatzgruppen also used gas vans, and many Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS units participated in shooting.

done. General chronological progression, noted. Small stationary gas chambers were already in use by 1939 and the gas vans came into use, thereafter. Kierzek (talk) 17:22, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

By 1941 extermination camps equipped with gas chambers were established at Auschwitz, Chełmno, Sobibor, Treblinka, and elsewhere. The Operation Reinhard camps were not established until 1942

Fixed

Might be worth mentioning that about half of Jews killed were Polish Jews, and most of those were dead by the end of 1942.

If we begin to break down Jews by nationality won't we run into POV issues related to focusing on Jews from one country but not another?

most German citizens disapproved Evans is quoted as writing that "on the whole, German citizens did not approve". To me, these are not semantically equivalent. Not approving of something is not the same as disapproving of it (one might be neutral or ambivalent), and "on the whole" does not necessarily mean most, just a majority or consensus view. If there is concern about repeating a quote, surely another one could be found.

Good point. Perhaps rephrase this to say "most German citizens did not approve"?

Replies by me.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 00:25, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Further replies by me.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 02:48, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from White Shadows

The length of this review is getting to the point where I think it may be wise to break things down into points which have yet to be addressed, and those which are still outstanding. The other noms and myself have been bouncing around addressing points here and there that I'm afraid we may accidentally still miss an outstanding issue here or there.--White Shadows ^{Let’s Talk} 16:31, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As long as individual reviewers use separate sections, keep track and don't support until they are satisfied, you should be ok IMHO. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:54, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Ian

I don't know if I'll have time to go through this systematically so will probably concentrate on the lead and various other sections as they catch my eye. To begin...

Culture

"Propaganda became less effective towards the end of the war, as people were able to obtain information outside of official channels." -- I think the question then arises, "how" did they obtain this info? BTW, I think we can safely lose the "of" in "outside of"... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:40, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from CPA-5

I am glad to see this page got that far, hopefully it would get FAC soon too. Anyway here are my comments, hopefully it is usefull. CPA-5 (talk) 11:20, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See some American English words like.

organization (Okey this one can be used as Britsh too but there are two different organisations one called organization and the other one called organisation.) (Background section)

"especially its paramilitary organization Sturmabteilung" and "disrupting the meetings of rival organizations and attacking their members (as well as Jewish people)"

done.

labor (Persecution of Roma section)

"Following the invasion of Poland, 2,500 Roma and Sinti people were deported from Germany to the General Government where they were imprisoned in labor camps."

done.

outmaneuvering (Conquest of Europe section)

"After outmaneuvering the Allies in Belgium and forcing the evacuation of many British and French troops at Dunkirk,"

done.

marginalized (Same as the organization the whole page use -ise instead -ize at the end of such words.) (Ideology section)

"The NSDAP remained small and marginalized, managing 2.6% of the federal vote in 1928, prior to the on-set of the Great Depression in 1929.")

done.

advised (Conquest of Europe section)

"Grand Admiral Erich Raeder had advised Hitler in June that air superiority was a pre-condition for a successful invasion of Britain,"

Correct me if I am wrong, but would it not be the same here; it would not be -ice. Kierzek (talk) 18:12, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my bad I now realised it is already in it's correct spot. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 09:04, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

defense (Wehrmacht section)

"The unified armed forces of Germany from 1935 to 1945 were called the Wehrmacht (defense force)."

done.

I can hunt for those, as we are using British English. With that said, it would safe time if you could list where. Thanks, Kierzek (talk) 13:52, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kierzek: Here you have them. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 17:24, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"The Nazi government declared a "Day of National Labor" for May Day 1933, and invited many trade union delegates to Berlin for celebrations." should it not be "The Nazi Government declared a "Day of National Labor" for May Day 1933, and invited many trade union delegates to Berlin for celebrations."?
"the Czechoslovak government" --> "the Czechoslovak Government"
"He permanently postponed the invasion, a plan which the commanders of the German army had never taken entirely seriously." --> "He permanently postponed the invasion, a plan which the commanders of the German Army had never taken entirely seriously."
"The West German government estimated a death toll of 2.2 million civilians due to the flight and expulsion of Germans and through forced labour in the Soviet Union." --> "The West German Government estimated a death toll of 2.2 million civilians due to the flight and expulsion of Germans and through forced labour in the Soviet Union."
"which involved using quick coordinated assaults" --> "which involved using quick co-ordinated assaults"
" In 1943 alone, 9,000,000 tons of cereals, 2,000,000 tonnes (2,000,000 long tons; 2,200,000 short tons) of fodder,"? Do you mean short tons, long tons or tonnes?
"and for the most part did not coordinate their activities." --> "and for the most part did not co-ordinate their activities."
Dates of the battles please?

"After the successful Battle of Smolensk,"

done.

"the failed German offensive at the Battle of Kursk."

done.

Comments by Robinvp11

I commend your hard work on a topic so many people have opinions on, so I thought I'd limit myself to the Lead and Background :)

Germany conquered most of Europe by 1940;

Not really accurate, even for Western Europe (until 1942, most of France was ruled by Vichy) and its relevant because helping out Musssolini in South-Eastern Europe delayed the invasion of Russia in 1941. Maybe controlled much of Europe by early 1941 - that includes Hungary and Romania, conquest of Yugoslavia etc.

Tweaked it to fit the surrounding sentences to: "By early 1941, Germany controlled much of Europe." Kierzek (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Following the German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, the tide turned against the Nazis, who suffered major military defeats in 1943.

Should mention the entry of the US into the war (Lend-Lease was a major factor in Russian effectiveness), Stalingrad is probably accepted as the turning point and while the Germans lost the initiative in 1943, it was Operation Bagration in 1944 that broke Army Group Centre and the Wehrmacht.

Suggested wording; 'While the German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 was initially successful, Russian resistance and the entry of the US into the war meant that in the East, the Wehrmacht was forced onto the defensive in 1943 and by late 1944 had been pushed back to the pre-1939 border.'

What about this: "While the German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 was initially successful, the Soviet resurgence, and the entry of the US into the war meant that in the East, the Wehrmacht was forced onto the defensive in 1943 and by late 1944 had been pushed back to the pre-1939 border after suffering major military defeats." Kierzek (talk) 19:14, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"While the German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 was initially successful, Soviet resurgence and the entry of the US into the war meant the Wehrmacht lost the initiative on the Eastern Front in 1943 and by late 1944 had been pushed back to the pre-1939 border." ('defeat' is superfluous). But its your article - I'm always condensing my own editing (simpler is better) so its a suggestion.

Robinvp11 (talk) 11:51, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

done.

After the Allied invasion of France, Germany was conquered by the Soviet Union from the east and the other Allies from the west and capitulated in May 1945.

Per Overmans, 80% of the Wehrmacht was destroyed on the Eastern Front; the current wording doesn't really convey that.

Hitler's refusal to admit defeat led to massive destruction of German infrastructure and additional war-related deaths in the closing months of the war.

Again, per Overmans, 30% of total German military deaths occurred between January to April 1945 (civilian deaths were even more skewed); even though it ended in early May, 1945 was still the bloodiest single year of the war, which is something many are unaware of.

The victorious Allies initiated a policy of denazification and put many of the surviving Nazi leadership on trial for war crimes at the Nuremberg trials.

Accurate to say many of the senior leadership were tried but denazification was quickly dropped; those involved in the Wannsee conference who survived the war mostly continued their careers, while even those directly implicated in atrocities in the West (Barbie, Priebke) were incorporated into the post-1945 intelligence systems. Again, worth stating because it is still with us in the 'honourable Wehrmacht soldiers, nasty Nazis' idea (eg Generals' speech in Band of Brothers), and why Austria nearly elected a modern Nazi as President in 2016.

Should mention the post-1945 ethnic cleansing in Europe which was a direct result of the Nazi regime eg the removal of Germans from the Sudetenland and East Prussia. It is the most visible consequence of the Nazi regime that remains with us today.

Background; I don't want to overdo it :) so these are just thoughts (I'll happily provide wording if you want)

Severe setbacks to the German economy began after the war ended, partly because of reparations payments required under the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. The government printed money to make the payments and to repay the country's war debt, but the resulting hyperinflation led to inflated prices for consumer goods, economic chaos, and food riots.[3] When the government defaulted on their reparations payments in January 1923, French troops occupied German industrial areas along the Ruhr and widespread civil unrest followed.

I don't think this accurately depicts the origins of hyper-inflation, since there is substantial evidence that it was planned, in the early stages as least. More importantly, it doesn't cover the impact (the consolidation of German industry into huge conglomerates, an entire section of the middle-class ruined overnight by the loss of their pensions and war bond investments, many of whose children ended up as Nazis eg Himmler).

Well, as to the "origins of hyper-inflation" that is what Evans states per cited pages and also the wording was tweaked to the present form to meet what Peacemaker (see above), wanted. As far as the rest, that will have to be looked at for citing. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 19:14, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On reflection, it's more about impact (and I think that's a general point); this might not be what you want to use as a reference but its a clear guide to that; http://www.ketteringscienceacademy.org/_files/files/Homework/A07D984FCFE61D8768344130F9EC059F.pdf

Robinvp11 (talk) 11:51, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When the stock market in the United States crashed on 24 October 1929, the effect in Germany was dire.

Doesn't explain why ie the 20s boom in Germany and Austria was financed by short-term US funds, which were withdrawn when Wall Street crashed and several large Austrian and German banks failed.

Robinvp11 (talk) 18:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Again, quick overview of why the Crash was so catastrophic for Germany (much worse than either Britain or France); https://alphahistory.com/nazigermany/the-great-depression/

Robinvp11 (talk) 14:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, however, I rather not cite to a website. Sorry, I have not been able to do more as of late, but my real life time is very, very limited right now. Kierzek (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It will keep :). I included the website, not for citing per se but as an easy way to explain why its worth clarifying, plus its much easier to find a RS if you know what you're after.

Robinvp11 (talk) 19:59, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lingzhi

Inconsistent use of Publisher Location (95 with; 8 without)
10 possible instances of Missing identifier (ISSN, JSTOR, etc.);
7 Missing ISBN
5 possible instances of book chapters without page numbers
1 CS1 maint: Unfit url
26 missing archive links
Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 06:22, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

G'day @White Shadows, Kierzek, and Diannaa: This has been on the list for four months now and hasn't attracted a support as yet. I know it is a large and complex article and I think it deserves more time. I know there has been a lot of interest, but could you summarise what the state of play is regarding addressing each reviewer's comments? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:27, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peacemaker. Sorry but I am very busy with copyright clean-up and will not have time to assist with this for the foreseeable future. I think it can be closed/withdrawn. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:58, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Peacemaker, unfortunately, I am still in the middle of drawn-out divorce proceedings; that coupled with my regular work load as an attorney, has left me with a fraction of the available time I had even a few years ago to work on articles herein. I hope that changes, but I know it will not for the foreseeable future. It is always a pleasure to work with Diannaa and I have enjoyed working with White Shadows for the first time, as well. I think it can be closed. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 14:40, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.