This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has several serious problems. Firstly it appears to have been translated at least partially from German by a non-naitve English speaker, perhaps with the aid of an on-line translator. Secondly, it contains several obvious errors of fact: for instance it describes Otto Rahn as operative in Iraq during the 1941 coup attempt, while linking to the main article on Rahn (also with serious problems) which describes him as dying in 1939.
More fundamentally, though more subjectively, it makes the argument thatthe true reason for the ostensibly natural historical expedition was occultist, to make make contact with 'secret amsters' in Tibet. While there may in fact be soemthing to this, no substantiation is offered, and the article seems to be encrusted with a lot of typical occultist drivel. 75.0.38.166 04:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Considering the availability of free images from the German Federal Archive, this article has entirely too many non-free images, particularly at the end. I have replaced one with a much better one (which actually shows the face of the man described, Beger); but several non-free images remain.
â Ken g6 ( talk) 05:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
I have added a couple of useful refs but a lot of the relevant material is on microfilm in the NA. The Levenda work, although emotive, is well sourced and provides sources and indications for the microfilm rolls if anyone is down that way with some time on their hands. Hope this helps. Ernstblumberg ( talk) 09:19, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I have started removing or regrouping information not relevant to the subject (Heinrich Harrer's climbing debut, the Nanga Parbat expedition). For Harrer's in-depth biography, see the French Wikipedia page.-- Elnon ( talk) 01:45, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the article suffers from POV. For a more objective appreciation, I recommend reading:
As said earlier, this iron man passage is mere speculation, I would suggest to delete it or to put it into perspective. No researchers have been asked regarding its origin. It's a real non-sense speculation discussion. For a paper by Prof. Bayer regarding this see: http://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/fileadmin/pdf/publikationen/Bayer_2012-Trousers.pdf 213.182.68.42 ( talk) 15:15, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Other problem : self reference, the article start with an introduction lacking ref, citing an article that is on wikipedia. -- Rédacteur Tibet ( talk) 21:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
The title SS Tibet Expedition is not based on recent reference. The official title of this expedition was "Ernst SchÀfer German Expedition to Tibet" as stated by two recent and neutral references. There are no reference claiming that SS Tibet Expedition was the official title of the expedition. -- Rédacteur Tibet ( talk) 16:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
"SS Tibet-Expedition" is not the official title of the expedition but "Deutsche Tibet-Expedition Ernst SchĂ€fer" is the official title. The academic standard work on the Expedition and the myths sourrounding it is for sure: "Nazis of Tibet: A Twentieth Century Myth." In: Monica Esposito (ed.), Images of Tibet in the 19th and 20th Centuries. Paris: Ăcole française d'ExtrĂȘme-Orient (EFEO), coll. Ătudes thĂ©matiques 22, vol. I, 2008, 63-96 by Isrun Engelhardt: http://indologica.de/drupal/?q=node/513 The Wiki-article seems to need a revision or clean up. I lack time to do that. Also the more than 1000 images should be linked: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Deutsche_Tibet-Expedition_Ernst_Sch%C3%A4fer The claim that the 'Ahnenerbe' sponsored it is plain wrong too, hence I removed that wrong and unverified claim from the article. Wikipedia relies mainly on WP:RS and not twilight literature. Engelhardt, Brauen, Dodin/RĂ€ther are the prime sources which should be used or consulted; McKay's Tricycle article is in many ways incorrect and an exaggeration of the events - maybe this was done for the sake to make it more exciting for the reader, however, Engelhardt is an excellent and reliable source. Detlev Rose: I don't know this source. -- GelekT ( talk) 23:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
It would not be much of a surprise if GelekT was in fact a sock-puppet. His first appearance and edit in Wikipedia is dated 23:34, 21 February 2010, and all subsequent edits are restricted to the German Tibet Expedition article and talk pages. How convenient!-- Elnon ( talk) 01:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
SS-Tibet-Expedition is the designation used by Ernst SchÀfer himself
The designation was also found in German newspapers
At the end of the Second World War, the same designation was adopted
SS-Tibet-Expedition has been used also by
I added to the designation section the fact, that SchĂ€fer changed the letterhead to âDeutsche Tibet Expedition Ernst SchĂ€fer.â. This is what I added: After the German Consul-General in Calcutta criticised in his report to the German Foreign Office the letterhead, "arguing that the prescribed letterhead was counter-productive and immediately generated mistrust among the British", SchĂ€fer "ordered a new, discreet letterhead in Antiqua font, which read âDeutsche Tibet Expedition Ernst SchĂ€fer.â Reference: »Tibet in 1938â1939: The Ernst SchĂ€fer Expedition to Tibet«, Engelhardt 2007, p.17 and Note 38 p.250. 213.182.68.42 ( talk) 14:31, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
I think the designation section is better than what has been there so far by now. In another paper by Engelhart Tibetan Triangle: German, Tibetan and British Relations in the Context of Ernst SchÀfer's Expedition, 1938-1939, Asiatische Studien 58 (19 2004), 57- 113, she states:
213.182.68.42 ( talk) 11:22, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
I added also that SchÀfer used throughout the expedition only the non-SS letterheads.:
Claudio Mutti wrote one article in Italian (Le SS in Tibet, published in 2000) about this issue, and it contains serious mistakes. Not the least: he wrote that the expedition met the Panchen Lama, who ... was dead at that time, Mutti even claim a treaty was signed by the Panchen Lama with the 3rd Reich. The reference cited in the article is in French, apparently a translation published in 2005 of the paper originally published in Italian. Due to important mistakes it contains, I think this reference can be omitted from the article. -- RĂ©dacteur Tibet ( talk) 09:24, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
There is still this dubious source Trimondis included. Trimondis are not accepted by scientists as a reliable source. They are classified as a source following conspiracy theories etc. This is no academic source, and also not WP:RS in any way. It should be removed when there is a striving for a proper WP article. (Or is the article to continue to spin history?) One could include Trimondis in a special section about Myth Producing Sources or so. But not in the main body of the text. For details about Trimondis see e.g. Prof. Schlieter (University of Bern): http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/frontdoor.php?source_opus=8625; or Dodin/RĂ€ther in Imagining Tibet: Between Shangri-la and Feudal Oppression, footnote: 38:
Also Prof. Martin Brauen (Dreamworld Tibet) and Engelhardt state clearly that this is a dubious source; e.g. Engelhardt in Nazis of Tibet about Victor & Victoria Trimondi [i.e. Herbert & Maria Röttgen]:
Martin Brauen, Dreamworld Tibet, 2004, page 80 â see especially his chapter: B: The neo-Nazis and Tibet, pp. 50-81:
Tromondis should therefore be removed because they don't meet in any way WP:RS. 213.182.68.42 ( talk) 16:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Though it's talked a lot about Ahnenerbe, Himmler, SS etc. the real objectives of SchÀfer himself have not been included in the article. Hence, I put a section at the start of the article which state's SchÀfer's own objectives:
The new section of objectives became somewhat unbalanced. Therefore I quoted Roger Croston who not only agrees with SchÀfer but also quotes NYT, and bases his POV an present research results:
213.182.68.42 ( talk) 14:48, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
This source should not be used, at it not neutral. It also contains mistakes. See discussion in French fr:Discussion:Expédition allemande au Tibet (1938-1939)/Archives. For instance, Mutti pretend Panchen Lama met the German expedition and signed a friendship treaty with the 3rd Reich. This is impossible, as the Panchen Lama died in 1937. See also discussion above (Reference credibility), about Mutti and Trimondis.-- Rédacteur Tibet ( talk) 16:15, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has several serious problems. Firstly it appears to have been translated at least partially from German by a non-naitve English speaker, perhaps with the aid of an on-line translator. Secondly, it contains several obvious errors of fact: for instance it describes Otto Rahn as operative in Iraq during the 1941 coup attempt, while linking to the main article on Rahn (also with serious problems) which describes him as dying in 1939.
More fundamentally, though more subjectively, it makes the argument thatthe true reason for the ostensibly natural historical expedition was occultist, to make make contact with 'secret amsters' in Tibet. While there may in fact be soemthing to this, no substantiation is offered, and the article seems to be encrusted with a lot of typical occultist drivel. 75.0.38.166 04:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Considering the availability of free images from the German Federal Archive, this article has entirely too many non-free images, particularly at the end. I have replaced one with a much better one (which actually shows the face of the man described, Beger); but several non-free images remain.
â Ken g6 ( talk) 05:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
I have added a couple of useful refs but a lot of the relevant material is on microfilm in the NA. The Levenda work, although emotive, is well sourced and provides sources and indications for the microfilm rolls if anyone is down that way with some time on their hands. Hope this helps. Ernstblumberg ( talk) 09:19, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I have started removing or regrouping information not relevant to the subject (Heinrich Harrer's climbing debut, the Nanga Parbat expedition). For Harrer's in-depth biography, see the French Wikipedia page.-- Elnon ( talk) 01:45, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the article suffers from POV. For a more objective appreciation, I recommend reading:
As said earlier, this iron man passage is mere speculation, I would suggest to delete it or to put it into perspective. No researchers have been asked regarding its origin. It's a real non-sense speculation discussion. For a paper by Prof. Bayer regarding this see: http://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg.de/fileadmin/pdf/publikationen/Bayer_2012-Trousers.pdf 213.182.68.42 ( talk) 15:15, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Other problem : self reference, the article start with an introduction lacking ref, citing an article that is on wikipedia. -- Rédacteur Tibet ( talk) 21:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
The title SS Tibet Expedition is not based on recent reference. The official title of this expedition was "Ernst SchÀfer German Expedition to Tibet" as stated by two recent and neutral references. There are no reference claiming that SS Tibet Expedition was the official title of the expedition. -- Rédacteur Tibet ( talk) 16:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
"SS Tibet-Expedition" is not the official title of the expedition but "Deutsche Tibet-Expedition Ernst SchĂ€fer" is the official title. The academic standard work on the Expedition and the myths sourrounding it is for sure: "Nazis of Tibet: A Twentieth Century Myth." In: Monica Esposito (ed.), Images of Tibet in the 19th and 20th Centuries. Paris: Ăcole française d'ExtrĂȘme-Orient (EFEO), coll. Ătudes thĂ©matiques 22, vol. I, 2008, 63-96 by Isrun Engelhardt: http://indologica.de/drupal/?q=node/513 The Wiki-article seems to need a revision or clean up. I lack time to do that. Also the more than 1000 images should be linked: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Deutsche_Tibet-Expedition_Ernst_Sch%C3%A4fer The claim that the 'Ahnenerbe' sponsored it is plain wrong too, hence I removed that wrong and unverified claim from the article. Wikipedia relies mainly on WP:RS and not twilight literature. Engelhardt, Brauen, Dodin/RĂ€ther are the prime sources which should be used or consulted; McKay's Tricycle article is in many ways incorrect and an exaggeration of the events - maybe this was done for the sake to make it more exciting for the reader, however, Engelhardt is an excellent and reliable source. Detlev Rose: I don't know this source. -- GelekT ( talk) 23:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
It would not be much of a surprise if GelekT was in fact a sock-puppet. His first appearance and edit in Wikipedia is dated 23:34, 21 February 2010, and all subsequent edits are restricted to the German Tibet Expedition article and talk pages. How convenient!-- Elnon ( talk) 01:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
SS-Tibet-Expedition is the designation used by Ernst SchÀfer himself
The designation was also found in German newspapers
At the end of the Second World War, the same designation was adopted
SS-Tibet-Expedition has been used also by
I added to the designation section the fact, that SchĂ€fer changed the letterhead to âDeutsche Tibet Expedition Ernst SchĂ€fer.â. This is what I added: After the German Consul-General in Calcutta criticised in his report to the German Foreign Office the letterhead, "arguing that the prescribed letterhead was counter-productive and immediately generated mistrust among the British", SchĂ€fer "ordered a new, discreet letterhead in Antiqua font, which read âDeutsche Tibet Expedition Ernst SchĂ€fer.â Reference: »Tibet in 1938â1939: The Ernst SchĂ€fer Expedition to Tibet«, Engelhardt 2007, p.17 and Note 38 p.250. 213.182.68.42 ( talk) 14:31, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
I think the designation section is better than what has been there so far by now. In another paper by Engelhart Tibetan Triangle: German, Tibetan and British Relations in the Context of Ernst SchÀfer's Expedition, 1938-1939, Asiatische Studien 58 (19 2004), 57- 113, she states:
213.182.68.42 ( talk) 11:22, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
I added also that SchÀfer used throughout the expedition only the non-SS letterheads.:
Claudio Mutti wrote one article in Italian (Le SS in Tibet, published in 2000) about this issue, and it contains serious mistakes. Not the least: he wrote that the expedition met the Panchen Lama, who ... was dead at that time, Mutti even claim a treaty was signed by the Panchen Lama with the 3rd Reich. The reference cited in the article is in French, apparently a translation published in 2005 of the paper originally published in Italian. Due to important mistakes it contains, I think this reference can be omitted from the article. -- RĂ©dacteur Tibet ( talk) 09:24, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
There is still this dubious source Trimondis included. Trimondis are not accepted by scientists as a reliable source. They are classified as a source following conspiracy theories etc. This is no academic source, and also not WP:RS in any way. It should be removed when there is a striving for a proper WP article. (Or is the article to continue to spin history?) One could include Trimondis in a special section about Myth Producing Sources or so. But not in the main body of the text. For details about Trimondis see e.g. Prof. Schlieter (University of Bern): http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/frontdoor.php?source_opus=8625; or Dodin/RĂ€ther in Imagining Tibet: Between Shangri-la and Feudal Oppression, footnote: 38:
Also Prof. Martin Brauen (Dreamworld Tibet) and Engelhardt state clearly that this is a dubious source; e.g. Engelhardt in Nazis of Tibet about Victor & Victoria Trimondi [i.e. Herbert & Maria Röttgen]:
Martin Brauen, Dreamworld Tibet, 2004, page 80 â see especially his chapter: B: The neo-Nazis and Tibet, pp. 50-81:
Tromondis should therefore be removed because they don't meet in any way WP:RS. 213.182.68.42 ( talk) 16:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Though it's talked a lot about Ahnenerbe, Himmler, SS etc. the real objectives of SchÀfer himself have not been included in the article. Hence, I put a section at the start of the article which state's SchÀfer's own objectives:
The new section of objectives became somewhat unbalanced. Therefore I quoted Roger Croston who not only agrees with SchÀfer but also quotes NYT, and bases his POV an present research results:
213.182.68.42 ( talk) 14:48, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
This source should not be used, at it not neutral. It also contains mistakes. See discussion in French fr:Discussion:Expédition allemande au Tibet (1938-1939)/Archives. For instance, Mutti pretend Panchen Lama met the German expedition and signed a friendship treaty with the 3rd Reich. This is impossible, as the Panchen Lama died in 1937. See also discussion above (Reference credibility), about Mutti and Trimondis.-- Rédacteur Tibet ( talk) 16:15, 6 June 2016 (UTC)