Revision 881151528 of "Talk:Adolf Hitler" on enwiki

{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header|noarchives=yes|search=no}}
{{Vital article|level=3|topic=People|class=GA}}
{{Controversial}}
{{Not a forum}}
{{calm}}
{{Round in circles|search=no}}
{{Annual readership}}
{{British English}}
{{Article history
|action1=FAC
|action1date=02:26, 26 July 2005
|action1link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Adolf Hitler/archive1
|action1result=not promoted
|action1oldid=19612729

|action2=GAN
|action2date=17:11, 19 December 2005
|action2result=listed
|action2oldid=31982874

|action3=GAR
|action3date=02:08, 22 April 2006
|action3result=delisted
|action3oldid=49509950

|action4=FAC
|action4date=16:41, 26 March 2007
|action4link=Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Adolf Hitler/archive2
|action4result=not promoted
|action4oldid=117993066

|action5=GAN
|action5date=2007-05-20
|action5result=failed
|action5oldid=132235459

|action6=PR
|action6date=2007-10-17
|action6link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Adolf Hitler/archive1
|action6result=Reviewed
|action6oldid=165201149

|action7=GAN
|action7date=2011-12-16
|action7link=Talk:Adolf Hitler/GA1
|action7result=listed
|action7oldid=466115580
|topic=World history
|currentstatus=GA
}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Biography|living=no|class=GA|core=yes|politician-work-group=yes|politician-priority=Top|military-work-group=yes|military-priority=Top|listas=Hitler, Adolf|attention=yes}}
{{WikiProject Germany|class=GA|importance=Top| B-Class-1=yes| B-Class-2 = yes| B-Class-3 = yes| B-Class-4 = yes| B-Class-5 = yes|attention=yes}}
{{WikiProject Austria|class=GA|importance=top|attention=yes}}
{{WikiProject Bavaria|class=GA|importance=Top}} 
{{WikiProject Death|class=GA|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject European history|class=GA|importance=top|attention=yes}}
{{WikiProject Military history|class=GA|B1=y|B2=y|B3=y|B4=y|B5=y|German=y|WWII=y|Biography=y|attention=yes}}
{{WikiProject Politics|class=GA|importance=top|attention=yes|fascism=yes|fascism-importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Jewish history|class=GA|importance=high|attention=yes}}
{{WP1.0|class=GA|importance=Top|category=History|v0.5=pass|WPCD=yes|attention=yes}}}}
{{Press | subject = article | title = Topics that spark Wikipedia 'edit wars' revealed | org = [[BBC News]] | url = http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23354613 | date = 18 July 2013 | archiveurl = | archivedate = | accessdate = 18 July 2013 |author2 = Josh Fjelstad |title2 = The 100 Longest Entries On Wikipedia |org2 = [[BuzzFeed]] |url2 = http://www.buzzfeed.com/fjelstud/the-100-longest-entries-on-wikipedia#.opb19rX7o |date2 = 22 June 2011 |accessdate2 = 13 December 2014}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 61
|algo = old(14d)
|archive = Talk:Adolf Hitler/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{archivebox|auto=short|bot = lowercase sigmabot III|age = 14
|{{Template:PrefixIndex|1=Talk:Adolf Hitler/H|redr=yes}}
*[[/GA1]]
*[[/mentioning the (mis?)spelling Adolph]]
}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Talk:Adolf Hitler/Archive index|mask=Talk:Adolf_Hitler/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=yes}}

== Frankenberg ==
According to [http://jewish1191.rssing.com/chan-15120684/all_p32.html an online historical timeline] Frankenberg was a common Jewish family name. A Jewish member of the Reichstag held it, as well as composer Paul Ben Haim. Not all Jewish families associated themselves with the registered Jewish community, Especially if they themselves were assimilated.[[User:Pashute|פשוט pashute ♫]] ([[User talk:Pashute|talk]]) 12:05, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

[[Category:GA-Class Nazi Germany articles]]

== Hitler as demagogue and "Pan-German revolutionary" ==
When I removed the words "demagogue and Pan-German revolutionary" from the opening statement of Adolf Hitler's WP page, it was reverted with a statement that those descriptors had been agreed to on the Talk Page. So I may get a hearing on why I think that both "Demagogue" and "Pan-German revolutionary" are not accurate descriptors of Adolf Hitler. Demagogue is little more than a pejorative. Many politicians used demagoguery such as President Franklin Roosevelt, when he railed against "the malefactors of great wealth." Stalin also used demagoguery to more sinister purposes when he singled out the so-called "Kulaks." The point is that unlike dictator which you can accurately describe Hitler as, demagogue stinks of insult, and is not professional for Wikipedia if it truly seeks to have  a Neutral Point Of View or (NPOV). That means that you can't just discard professional standards just because the subject is evil. As for "Pan-German revolutionary", Hitler indeed subscribed to a Pan-German ideology as did many German Austrians. He did indeed mount an successful putsch or "coup de' tat" but he gained power as the representative of one of the largest political parties in the Reichstag or "parliament." He wasn't a revolutionary. I think the opening statement should note he was a German politician, as well as noting the office held Reichskanzler or Reichs Chancellor.  [[User:NapoleonX|NapoleonX]] ([[User talk:NapoleonX|talk]]) 01:58, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
:Both of these points have been discussed in depth by a number of editors.  Please read those discussions, the first two threads in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Adolf_Hitler/Archive_61#German_politician? this archive]. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 02:06, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
::[[Sebastian Haffner]] It wasn't a revolution according to this source: [http://web.nli.org.il/sites/NLI/English/collections/personalsites/Israel-Germany/World-War-2/Pages/Sebastian-Haffner.aspx].[[User:Xx236|Xx236]] ([[User talk:Xx236|talk]]) 09:08, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
:::he says it was all done legally. But historians emphasize that 99% of German politics was radically changed because Hitler was given legal power to do anything he wanted.  [[User:Rjensen|Rjensen]] ([[User talk:Rjensen|talk]]) 09:32, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
::::The question of whether Hitler was a revolutionary or not has been thoroughly discussed, and is well-sourced. One counter-source does not quate to removing it from the article. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 21:17, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
:::::The reasoning on "demagogue" in that discussion seemed thin to me. Of course Hitler was a demagogue, but he was also a mass murderer, which was no less essential to his character and to his impact on history than his having been a "demagogue". "Demagogue" may belong somewhere in the first paragraph (as his role in the perpetration of the Holocaust is), but not in the first sentence—"demagoguery" was how he gained and maintained power; it wasn't what he did with it. What he was was a politician, though I also won't object to "revolutionary," although I have similar misgivings regarding how much weight that particular identity should be afforded. Regardless how he obtained his office, though—is it really necessary for a "revolutionary" to have successfully fought a revolutionary war?—he instituted a new German order that was radically different from what existed just a few years before he became ''Führer''. If that's not a revolution, then the word would have to be redefined, which is not Wikipedia's job. [[User:WP Ludicer|WP Ludicer]] ([[User talk:WP Ludicer|talk]]) 21:27, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

::::::I share WP Ludicer's misgivings. That AH was a demagogue is undeniable, that he was a pan-German nationalist equally so. That he was a revolutionary (in the sense of someone who seeks to - and in AH's case,  manages to - overturn the existing political order) is also a fact - though I doubt how universally the descriptor 'revolutionary' is used for AH, possibly because the term is less often used of right-wing 'revolutions'.

::::::What I am uneasy about is whether using these terms adds to, or impedes the flow of the opening para. An opening para which failed to mention - Nazi Party, Chancellor, dictator, Fuhrer, WWII or the Holocaust would be doing a disservice to the subject and the reader. I question whether 'demagogue' and 'pan-German revolutionary' are in the same league of significance. I 'went along with' the addition in the previous discussion, though I was not wholly persuaded that the terms deserved 'pole position'.[[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 18:42, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

I just made the same edit and was reverted. [[MOS:BLPLEAD]] states: "The lead sentence should describe the person as he or she is '''commonly''' described in reliable sources." (emphasis added). It further states that we should "avoid overloading the lead paragraph with various and sundry roles; instead, emphasize what made the person notable". I think it's pretty clear that "Pan-German revolutionary" is not ''commonly'' used to describe Hitler. In fact, googling the phrase brings up mostly Wikipedia mirrors. (Whether ''some'' sources use the term is irrelevant). I would agree that the term "demagogue" is commonly applied to Hitler, but it's not used in the lead sentence of Wikipedia articles (even for others who would commonly be described as demagogues). [https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aen.wikipedia.org+"was+a+*+demagogue" According to Google], there is only one other WP article – [[Carl Fredrik Pechlin]] – where the subject is described as a demagogue in the first sentence. I believe we should be as simple as possible and remove the other two terms. [[User:Ivar the Boneful|Ivar the Boneful]] ([[User talk:Ivar the Boneful|talk]]) 04:04, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
:In fact, I can't find the phrase "Pan-German revolutionary" other than in Wikipedia mirrors / sources quoting from Wikipedia. Does anyone have access to the sources listed so we can verify that it's actually a term people use? We shouldn't be coining neologisms in such a high-profile article, if that means removing "Pan-German" and keeping "revolutionary" it would still be an improvement. [[User:Ivar the Boneful|Ivar the Boneful]] ([[User talk:Ivar the Boneful|talk]]) 04:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
::Gee, that's because it occurs in printed media and not online.  Please see the references cited. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 05:39, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
:::[[User:Beyond My Ken]] What's with the sarcasm? I'm well aware it's an offline source, that's why I'm asking for a quote. At the moment it fails verification. If you have access to the sources, please look at the pages cited and provide a quote containing the phrase "pan-German revolutionary". [[User:Ivar the Boneful|Ivar the Boneful]] ([[User talk:Ivar the Boneful|talk]]) 07:35, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
:::::You haven;t verified it, and a quote wouldn;t do it.  Read the Housden book, and get back to us. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 11:35, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
::::The threshold for such a much-written-about subject, and for pole-position in the article, should suely not be A QUOTE, but multiple use among best sources. I question whether that threshold would be passed. [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 08:55, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
:::::As BMK has linked to, we had quite a long discussion over this. I still believe that demagogue and pan-German revolutionary (because Hitler articulated and carried out a version of Pan-Germanism which resulted in a Nazi dominated Europe, the east of which was described as an 'ocean of death' by IIRC, Bullock. It doesn't get more revolutionary than that). Demagogue speaks for itself. To have H described as a 'Politician' and 'Leader of Germany' is rather understating things. [[User:Simon Adler|Simon Adler]] ([[User talk:Simon Adler|talk]]) 23:28, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

::::::'Politician' and 'Leader of Germany' to me - though a bit anodyne on first reading, are the price we pay for NPOV. Regardless of how infamous someone is, we open by factually recording the area of human activity for which the subject is known. At the risk of repeating myself, 'demagogue' I'm neutral about, 'pan-German' ditto. However I question whether 'revolutionary' is either a term used widely by sources, or among the most important things to say about AH. I heven't read the book which BMK cites, but thinking about it, I was persuaded that AH had all the elements of a revolutionary - working towards a consciously formulated, ideologically based, fundamental and radical change to the political and social culture (sources don't generally call people revolutionaries if the changes are forced by outside circumstance rather than driven by ideology, nor if the changes are largely reactionary in nature - otherwise every Generalissimo or Colonel overthrowing a civilian democracy would be described as 'a revolutionary'). But is describing AH as a revolutionary, the most significant thing to say about him in the opening lines? Is the meaning clear to the general reader? Is the term itself widely used by sources - or do we have to extrapolate it from what they do say. Certainly they would all say that he attempted to institute a 'new order' politically and socially - but is that close enough to the actual term 'revolutionary'? I'm not so sure. [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 00:29, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

I just read the lead and was very astonished to find Hitler described as a "demagogue and pan-German revolutionary". While both may be technically true (although "revolutionary" seems dubious given that Hitler acted through rather than against government institutions), I agree with others above that this is certainly not how I understand ''most'' reliable sources succinctly characterize Hitler; they instead, as far as I can tell, use such descriptors as "dictator", "supreme leader" or "Reich chancellor". That Hitler was a demagogue and a pan-German ideologue can certainly be mentioned, but not in the very first sentence. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sandstein|<span style="color:white;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">''' Sandstein '''</span>]]</span></small> 18:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
:By comparison, here's how other major Wikipedia versions describe Hitler in the lead sentence:
:* [[:de:Adolf Hitler]]: Dictator of the German Reich ("Diktator des Deutschen Reiches")
:* [[:fr:Adolf Hitler]]: German ideologue and statesman ("idéologue et homme d'État allemand")
:* [[:es:Adolf Hitler]]: German politician, soldier, painter and writer ("político, militar, pintor y escritor alemán)"
:* [[:it:Adolf Hitler]]: Austrian-German politician, Reich Chancellor and dictator, under the title of Führer, of Germany (" politico austriaco naturalizzato tedesco, Cancelliere del Reich dal 1933 e dittatore, col titolo di Führer, della Germania"). <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sandstein|<span style="color:white;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">''' Sandstein '''</span>]]</span></small> 18:19, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm glad NapoleonX brought this matter up for discussion. In nearly a century of scholarly study of Hitler, how much time has been spent debating whether he is a "dictator" or a "demagogue" or a "pan-German revolutionary"? None? Why should WP need to re-invent the wheel on this? "Dictator" is the word the whole world uses, is it not? "Adolf Hitler was a German dictator and leader of the Nazi Party. He rose to power as Chancellor in 1933..." [[User:Levivich|Levivich]] ([[User talk:Levivich|talk]]) 23:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
:I've gone ahead and simplified the opening sentence as suggested. New version reads: "Adolf Hitler...was a German politician and leader of the Nazi Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei; NSDAP). He rose to power to become dictator of Germany, serving as Chancellor from 1933 and Führer ("Leader") from 1934." In a nutshell this removes the terms " demagogue" and "Pan-German revolutionary", which I don't think belong in the lead, especially in the opening sentence. — [[User:Diannaa|Diannaa]]&nbsp;<span style="color:red">🍁</span>&nbsp;([[User talk:Diannaa|talk]]) 02:41, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
::Diannaa: I'm not really sure there was a consensus here to make that change, but I'm not going to object to it, especially if it will stop these discussions from popping up every couple of months.  After all, let's face it, who doesn't know who Hitler was, and what he was noted for?  The previous description seemed better to me in that it had more scope, containing more of the aspects of his historical significance, but the new one is (of course) correct as well. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 03:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
:::Dianna solved the problem--good work!  [[User:Rjensen|Rjensen]] ([[User talk:Rjensen|talk]]) 03:46, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
:::Just because we can source it, doesn't mean we should add it. There's at least 4 people who disagree with the addition (Sandstein, Rjensen, Levivich, and myself) so removal seems a good choice to me at this time. — [[User:Diannaa|Diannaa]]&nbsp;<span style="color:red">🍁</span>&nbsp;([[User talk:Diannaa|talk]]) 11:28, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
::::I stayed out of this discussion, but agree with Diannaa's change, accordingly. [[User:Kierzek|Kierzek]] ([[User talk:Kierzek|talk]]) 16:15, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
::::I agree with Diannaa's change as well (thank you Diannaa). I also agree with "demagogue" in the "Entry into politics" section, as per {{u|Hazhk}}'s edit [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adolf_Hitler&diff=876841100&oldid=876817626 here]. I noticed that some had issue with "politician" in the lead; I'm not sure if that word is problematic in the current version or not, but if it is, I suggest "Adolf Hitler ... was a German politician and leader of the Nazi Party..." could be "Adolf Hitler ... was leader of the German Nazi Party..." as "leader of the German Nazi Party" implies German politician (''and'' demagogue). Just a thought, though, I have no problem with it the way it is now. [[User:Levivich|Levivich]] ([[User talk:Levivich|talk]]) 21:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
:Now that this whole discussion is done and over with, could someone please lower the protection level for the AH page now? [[User:Karl Malone the Mailman|Karl Malone the Mailman]] ([[User talk:Karl Malone the Mailman|talk]]) 15:07, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

== "Imply" genocide? ==

:Some passages imply genocide.[128]

What? How does one imply genocide?

I think I know what we're trying to say here, but I doubt that's the best way to say it. But I don't have access to the source so I'm hesitant to reword it. Can someone help? --[[user:causa sui|causa sui]] ([[user talk:causa sui|talk]]) 06:34, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
:OK, the reference given is to Kershaw's single volume reduction of his two-volume biography, which I do not have, but I do have the two-volume version, which must be similar in content.  In book 1 ("Hubris"), Kershaw writes: <blockquote>On Hitler's central, overriding and all embracing obsession, the 'removal of the Jews', ''Mein Kampf'' added nothing to the ideas he had already formulated by 1919-20.  Extreme though the language of ''Mein Kampf'' was, it was no different to that which Hitler had been proclaiming for years.  Nor, for that matter, did the inherently genocidal terminology substantially vary from that of other writers and speakers on the ''volkisch'' Right, extending, as we have already seen, well back beyond the First World War. His bacterial imagery implied that Jews should be treated in the same way germs were dealt with: by extermination. (p.244)</blockquote>  Kershaw then goes on to talk about other examples of Hitler referring to "extermination" and "removal" of the Jews, both earlier and in ''Mein Kampf'', concluding "[H]owever little he had thought out the practical implications of what he was saying, its inherent genocidal thrust is undeniable."{{parabr}}So I think this is the genesis of the text "Some passages imply genocide," which I agree is much too weak a formulation.  I've re-written and extended it. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 07:21, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
:: Thank you. I made a small tweak, but this is much, much better. --[[user:causa sui|causa sui]] ([[user talk:causa sui|talk]]) 10:25, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

:::Agree that original terminology is both weak and vague - and BMK's clearer and more specific. I think a few 'tweaks' might be in order. suggest changing:

::::"The book laid out Hitler's plans for transforming German society into one based on race. Throughout, Jews are presented as the equivalent of "germs" and the "international poisoners" of society. The only way, according to Hitler's ideology, for the societal illnesses they caused to be cured was by the "extermination" of the Jews entirely. Although Hitler spent little time on exactly how this was to be accomplished, his "inherent genocidal thrust is undeniable," according to Kershaw."

:::To:

::::"The book laid out Hitler's plans for transforming German society into one based on race. In it Jews are ''characterised as/described as/equated with'' "germs" and the "international poisoners" of society. The book thus implied that the only way to cure the societal illnesses Jews supposedly caused, was by their "extermination" entirely. Although Hitler spent little time on exactly how this was to be accomplished, his "inherent genocidal thrust is undeniable," according to Kershaw."      - ''characterised as/described as/equated with'' is of course one of, not all three.

:::My logic is based on the quote(s) that BMK supplies above - based on which I don't think we can, or need to, say 'throughout' and retaining the element that genocide is strongly implied in MK, but not unambiguously stated. [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 14:10, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
::::"Equated with" is fine, but I think your formulation of the second sentence is weaker - Kershaw does say, once, that it's "implied", but also says, twice, that it's "inherent".  How about this:

:::::The book laid out Hitler's plans for transforming German society into one based on race. In it Jews are equated with "germs" and are described as the "international poisoners" of society. The "inherent genocidal terminology" of the ideology Hitler presents implies that the only way to cure the societal illnesses Jews supposedly caused was by their "extermination" entirely. Although Hitler spent little time on exactly how this was to be accomplished, his "inherent genocidal thrust is undeniable," according to Kershaw.

::::[[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 15:29, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
:::::I just checked the 2008 edition, and a main point made was that Hitler was steadfast in his world view, based on a racial view and his thoughts focused on the Jews, but "...these terrible passages are not the beginning of a one-way track to the 'Final Solution'. The road there was 'twisted', not straight". p. 150.
:::::Goes on to say, "But however little he thought out the practical implications of what he was saying, its inherent genocidal thrust is undeniable". p. 150. [[User:Kierzek|Kierzek]] ([[User talk:Kierzek|talk]]) 15:48, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
::::::Yes, Kershaw uses the exact same language in ''Hubris''. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 16:26, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

::::::Suggested tweaks to BMK's last: "The book laid out Hitler's plans for transforming German society into one based on race. In it Jews are equated with "germs" and are described as the "international poisoners" of society. The "inherent''ly'' genocidal terminology" of Mein Kampf implies that the only way to cure the societal illnesses Jews supposedly caused was by their "extermination". Although Hitler spent little time on exactly how this was to be accomplished, his "genocidal thrust is undeniable", according to Kershaw.

::::::First change is inherent to inherently (as it is a quote). Second change is to 'cut to the chase' of the terminology of the book, rather than terminology of the ideology presented in the book. Third change is avoiding a repetition of the second inherent/ly at the end. [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 16:18, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

:::::::I actually was going to cut the first "inherent" entirely as unnecessary.  And the part about "Hitler's ideology" is a call back to an earlier usage on Kershaw's part. Kershaw also (in the section I didn't quote directly, but Keirzek gives some of above) emphasis the continuity of Hitler's ideas before and after ''Mein Kampf'', so emphasizing the book itself at that point -- rather than Hitler's ideology -- weakens the point.  My edited suggestion is thus:

::::::::The book laid out Hitler's plans for transforming German society into one based on race. In it Jews are equated with "germs" and are described as the "international poisoners" of society. The "genocidal terminology" of the ideology Hitler presents implies that the only way to cure the societal illnesses Jews supposedly caused was by their "extermination" entirely. Although Hitler spent little time on exactly how this was to be accomplished, his "inherent genocidal thrust is undeniable," according to Kershaw.

:::::::[[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 16:26, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

:::::::::BMK, I understand what you are saying about the continuity of AH's beliefs regarding Jews - I wonder whether that is what is conveyed. Would "The "genocidal terminology" of Mein Kampf, and Hitler's earlier writings implied that the only way to cure the societal illnesses etc...." work? Either way I'm happy for others to decide and think the overall thrust of all the versions offered is much clearer and more explicit than what was there before. [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 18:01, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

::::::::::I'm good with the tweaks that Diannaa just made. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 18:25, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

:::::::::::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adolf_Hitler&diff=875877279&oldid=875413591 I tweaked her edit slightly], only on the rather pedantic point that "germs" is used by AH as an equivalence, whereas ""international poisoners" of society", is an exact description, rather than equivalence. [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 16:36, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
::::::::::::Good tweak. [[User:Beyond My Ken|Beyond My Ken]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 19:27, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

== Recent change to first few sentences ==

We recently had some changes to the first few sentences adding some descriptive terms. I proposed  moving some things around as it's just so convoluted and a bit awkward to start off like this. I have no problem with the terminology being used - just in the order  being used. He's primarily known as being the political leader of the Nazis and fuhrer of the country - thus this should be first in my view and the norm used in any biography about him. --[[User:Moxy|Moxy]] ([[User talk:Moxy|talk]]) 15:52, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

{{ quotation |Adolf Hitler (German: [ˈadɔlf ˈhɪtlɐ] (About this soundlisten); 20 April 1889 – 30 April 1945) was a German politician and  leader of the Nazi Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei; NSDAP), who rose to power in Germany as Chancellor in 1933 and Führer ("Leader") in 1934. As a demagogue and Pan-German revolutionary his dictatorship from 1933 to 1945 initiated World War II in Europe by invading Poland in September 1939.}}

:See first section of talk - Hitler as demagogue and "Pan-German revolutionary". [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 16:32, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
::I see ..This is just a proposal to fix the order that is clearly a problem as seen above  --[[User:Moxy|Moxy]] ([[User talk:Moxy|talk]]) 16:48, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

== Switching "Jews" to "Non-Aryans" ==

Hitler actually believed in a social pyramid. Aryans were on top, then people with black hair/brunettes, then gingers, then people who were not white, mentally disabled, physically disabled, or homosexual. I think that putting "Non-Aryan" could then make people wonder, "What is an Aryan?"

I think that changing this could help people know more about his true intentions, not saying they are in any way good.  <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Chris Roe234|Chris Roe234]] ([[User talk:Chris Roe234#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Chris Roe234|contribs]]) 05:01, 5 January 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== No Citations in the Introductory Paragraphs? ==

Why are there no citations in the introductory paragraphs? Is there a reason behind it?  <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:IndianHistoryEnthusiast|IndianHistoryEnthusiast]] ([[User talk:IndianHistoryEnthusiast#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/IndianHistoryEnthusiast|contribs]]) 16:23, 28 January 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:No [[WP:RS]] citations are needed for the [[WP:Lead]] paragraphs, as it is all discussed and RS cited in the body text where the information being conveyed is mentioned. Only rarely will you find cites in the lead section of an article, for very specific reasons. [[User:Kierzek|Kierzek]] ([[User talk:Kierzek|talk]]) 17:47, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
::Basically, what Kierzek just said.  Citations aren't needed in the lead if they're found in the body of the article.  [[User:A Quest For Knowledge|A Quest For Knowledge]] ([[User talk:A Quest For Knowledge|talk]]) 19:13, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

RENUNCIA  AS FUNÇOES DE CHANCELLER, DE PRINCIPE HERDEIRO DO TRONO, DO PAPADO, DA RAINHA DO TRONO, NA HIERARQUIA DO TRONO DE PRINCIPE OF WALES E DAS CERIMONIAS DE IMPOSIÇAO DE ORDEM SACRA TODOS OS VERIFICADOS  NO GENESIS 9.6 ENQUANTO E DURANTE  O CERIMONIAL QUE PROLONGOU APOS A RENUNCIA DO PAPA E DO PAPADO DO BENTO XVI QUE JA NAO TEM OS QUERUBINS E A ORDEM E NAO PODE USAR A ORDEM ESTANDO FORA DA CADEIRA DO PAPADO, DESDE 28 DE FEVEREIRO DE 2013 E A REPUBLICA DEMOCRATICA DE SAO TOME E PRINCIPE POR TER A GRAÇA DE UMA ORDEM DAS NAÇOES UNIDAS EM 1974 NO ACORDO DE ARGEL NAO PODE OBRIGAL A ORDEM NOS CERIMONIAIS DE IMPOSIÇOES DE ORDENS SACRAS. USOS DE MICROCHIP IMPALNATADO NOS SERES HUMANOS E NOS ANIMAIS....TEXTO...A PRGANIZAÇAO DAS NAÇOES UNIDAS É UMA ORDEM INTERNACIONAL, QUANDO EM DIREITO PODE INVADIR TERRITORIOS DESOBEDIENTES E ATE DEPOR  AUTORIDADES QUE INCOMODAM A ORDEM INTERNACIONAL E ATE DOS DIREITOS HUMANOS E ATE DECIDIU  LEVAR PORTUGAL A MESA DAS NEGOCIAÇOES COM OS PARTIDOS QUE ADVOGARAM NA EPOCA  SREM REPRESENTANTES DOS AUTOTONOS, COISAS DAS POÇOTICAS E DOS POLITICOS COM LEITURAS DOS EMISSORES E OS RECEPTORES  COM NOTORIOS SABER  E AS LIVRES DOCENCIAS, DAS DEPENEDENCIAS E DAS INDEPENCEIAS, PORQUE O SER HUMANO TEM ALMA-PATRIO,  E NORMALMENTE NASCEM NAS PATRIAS E OBSERVANDO-SE O DIREITO CANONICO E O GENESIS 3.24 TODO E QUALQUER SER HUMANO TEM  O RESPEITO PELOS FOLEGOS DA VIDA, ARVORE DA VIDA,, ALMA, VIDA,  ESPIRITO, PRESENTE NO GENESIS 6.3 E OS 120 ANOS ATRIBUIDOS AO CORPO CARNE QUE DIFERE DO CORPO ESPIRITO, SERAFINS E AS TRAVESSURAS , QUERUBINS E AS TRAVESSURAS, TRONOS E AS TRAVESSIURAS, DOMINAÇOES E AS TRAVESSURA, POTENCIAS E AS TRAVESSURAS, VIRTUDES E AS TRAVESSURA, PRINCIPADOS E AS TRAVESSURAS, ARCANJPS E AS TRAVESSURAS , OS ANJOS E AS TRAVESSURAS, SAO DO FORUM DOS NOVE COROS , MAS RESERVADOS AOS ENTENDIDOS COM NOTORIOS SABER DO HOMEM DE SEXO MASCULINO E FEMININO, ASSIM COMO DEVE SABER O PAPA BENTO XVI E O SEU PAPADO EM RELAÇAO, A CERIMONIA RELIGIOSA DA IMPOSIÇAO DA ORDEM,,,ORDEM,,ORDEM SACRA, QUERIDA NO TERRITORIO DA ALEMANHA EM 2007, COM O MICROCHIP SACRO QUE FOI A REVELIA IMPLANTADO NUM CONTRIBUINTE E NACIONAL DE PORTUGAL 12221222 MAS REGISTADO EM ALEMANHA 80276150700138754429 AOK GERMANY, MAS O IMPLANTE FOI REALIZADO PELO BRITANICO CHARLES PHILIP ARTHUR GEORGE QUE NASCEU EM 14 DE NOVEMBRO DE 1948, E A MAE EM ABRIL DE 1926 E O PAI EM 1921.QUERIDO POR NOMEAÇAO PRINCIPE OF WALES EM 26 DE JULHO DE 1958, TAMBEM MENCIONADO COMO PRINCIPE HERDEIRO DO TRONO INGLES, ,MARIDO DA PRINCESA DIANA SPENCER E PAI DOS FILHOS  COM ESTATUTOS DE MAE  OU PAI DIVORCIADOS E NAO VIUVO, CHARLES VESTE-SE  DE BISPO, PORQUE  NO DIREITO CIVIL NINGUEM VESTE-SE COMO O PAPA, DESLOCA-SE A MAINZ, FRANKFURTZ ALEMANHA E A REVELIA IMPLANTA O O MICROCHIP ENTRE A OMOPLATA E O OMBRO ESQUERDO  DO ACONTRIBUINTE ANTONIO ALBERTINO AFONSO DIAS DA COSTA CABRAL SUPOSTAMENTE COM EPICENTRO  DA CONTENDA COM DENUNCIAS NOS JORNAIS NORWICH EVENING NEWS E EASTERN DAILLY EXPRESS EM 2005 E 2005 QUANDO O NACIONAL DE PORTUGAL E CO-PROPRIETARIO DE UM APARTAMENTO EM 19 Aº ESQUERDO RUA ILHA DE SAO TOME, COVA DA PIEDADE  ALMADA , PORTUGAL, NETO DE UM PORTUGUES , ALVARO AUGUSTO DA COSTA CABRAL, NATURAL DE VISEU, PORTUGAL E COM BENS  E ESCRITURAS EM SAO TOME E PRINCIPE DE PERO ESCUBAR E JOAO DE SANTAREM QUE DESCOBRIRAM AS ILHAS EM 1470 E 1471 DE UMA ORDEM QUE ERA ACEITE EM PORTUGAL DA BULA MANIFESTIS PROBATUM DESDE 23 DE 5 DE 1179, O CONTRIBUINTE PX824359d ANTONIO ALBERTINO AFONSO DIAS DA COSTA CABRAL, PASSOU A SER O VEHIVULO DO MICROCHIP DA RFID E DA VERICHIP COORPORATION , PARA FINS DA CERIMONIAS RELIGIOSA DE IMPOSICAO PARA ORDEM SACRA DESDE 2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012, SO QUE EM 11 DE FEVEREIRO DE 2013, O PAPA BENTO XVI RENUNCIA AS FUNÇOES DE PAPA E O VATICANO ANUNCIA QUE O PAPADO FOI DE FACTO RENUNCIADO TAMBEM AS 20HORAS DO DIA 28 DEFEVEREIRO DE 2013, O QUE LEGITIMA O FIM DO CERIMONIAL DE IMPLANTAÇAO DA PRDEM SACRA CONTRA ANTONIO ALBERTINO AFONSO DIAS DA COSTA CABRAL, JA POSSUIDOR DE UM SACRAMENTO QUE EH O BAPTISMO , MAS NAO COMPREENDE O SACRAMENTO DO NUMERO 4 DOS SETE SACRAMENTOS,SENDO ASSIM A PARTIR DE MARÇO DE 2013,2014, 2015 2016,2017,2018 ATE HOJE 31.01-2019 ESTA LIVRE DO CERIMONIAL DA IMPOSIÇAO DA ORDEM DO PAPA E DO PAPADO DO BENTO XVI, NAO OBSTANTE AS INFLUENCIAS QUE A SOCAPA VAI TENDO ATE NAS ILHAS DE SAO TOME E PRINCIPE  ONDE E NATIVO  E REGISTADO COM A CEDULA E A CERTIDAO 16257 E O BILHTE DE IDENTIDADE 17927, MAS PARA O CERIMONIAL  QUEREM-NO COM O REGISTO 60166.QUE OBSERVEM  O CORDAO UMBILICAL PATERNO MATERNO OS FILHOS E AS FILHAS E OS NETO, ASSIM COMO OS AVERBADOS E AS AVERBADAS EM OBEDIENCIA ENQUANTO E DURANTE O CERIMONIAL, DE REALÇAR, BEATRIZ DE CASTRO AFONSO, MARIA DE SACRAMENNTO DE GUADALUPE EM SAO TOME, ROSA MARIA SIMAO NATURAL DE SAO TOME, EM GUADALUPE E  FATIMA QUE TAMBEM O ASSISTIU EM RELACIONAMENTO EM MAINZ.FRANKFUTRZ ENQUANTO  OS ENGENDRAMENTOS DECORRIAM.ANTONIO ALBERTINO AFONSO DIAS DA COSTA CABRAL DESEJA A TODOS  NA TENDA DE REUNIAO BOA SORTE E DE NOTAR QUE PORTUGAL E A REPUBLICA DEMOCRATICA DE SAOTOME E PRINCIPE DEVERIAM ESTAR LIVRES DAS PRATICAS, TACTICAS E AS TECNICAS DE CERIMONIAS, DE IMPOSIÇAO DE ORDEM SACRAS,AS SAFRAS NO DEVIDO AOS DEVIDOS, IMPOSTOS AOS IMPOSTOS, TRIBUTOS AOS TRIBUTOS, TEMORES AOS TEMORES AS HONRAS AS HONRAS, NUM EFA UM HIN, NA MEDIDA , NO PESO E NA MEDIDA DOS LIQUIDOS, E QUE SEJA OBSERVADO A RESPONSABILIDADE DO GENESIS 9.5 E 9.6 ENQUANTO E DURANTE O CERIMONIAL DE IMPOSIÇAO DE ORDEM SACRA NO PAPADO DE PAPA BENTO XVI..  <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/197.159.167.86|197.159.167.86]] ([[User talk:197.159.167.86#top|talk]]) 19:43, 31 January 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->