![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Raised at WP:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_April_29#Category:Inventions_by_country. Your contributions are welcomed. Andy Dingley ( talk) 12:44, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
How can User:Biker Biker revert an edit, in which Petri dish, Schlenk flask or Büchner flask are mentioned as German inventions ? That's true and for each reader sure, that these chemical instruments were invented in Germany. 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 11:53, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Also Taximeter by Friedrich Wilhelm Gustav Bruhn, Abbe refractometer by Ernst Abbe and Daimler Victoria, the world's first meter-equipped (and gasoline-powered) taxicab, built by Gottlieb Daimler in 1897, were German inventions, that is sure. 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 11:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
And last but not least Copernican heliocentrism and Copernican revolution by Nicolaus Copernicus were German discoveries. Copernicus was a German astronom and each teacher and also normally each person in the world should know who Nicolaus Copernicus was 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 11:57, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
So if noone answer here, i will revert the incorrect edit by User:Biker Biker in some days. 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 12:07, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
A Silesian man is a German man. 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 16:33, 12 June 2013 (UTC) The mothers name was Barbara Watzenrode. "Watzenrode" is a German surname. 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 16:37, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
88.70.24.37 ( talk) 15:10, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
88.70.24.37 ( talk) 15:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Firstly Holy Roman Empire = Germany. That's historical fact. Secondly, it's not "nationalistic" to call Copernicus "German". In this case, as with many, the designation has little, if not nothing to do with national origin nor citizenship. It has to do with ethnicity and ethnic origins. Ethnicity is a much broader classification than nationality. I would not be opposed to Copernicus being double listed in an article on Poles. He doesn't need to be "claimed" by one specific group, if he was a part of both, or it is ambiguous. Perhaps we should be more keen to use the adjective "Germanic" when discussing these historical characters... Presidentbalut ( talk) 13:12, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
As far as Copernicus goes, you should probably go to Talk:Holy Roman Empire and see if you can convince everyone there that the Holy Roman Empire = Germany, and then change the article accordingly. And then go to Talk:Nicolaus Copernicus and have the Nicolaus Copernicus#Nationality section rewritten to only say that he was German. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 15:52, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
The crux of the matter is that the concept of (state-) citizenship wasn't too much developed in those days. Copernicus was part of a German-speaking minority in the state of Prussia that considered itself to be "teutsch" but was subject to the Polish king, because his hometown of Thorn had given up loalty to the State of the Teutonic Order (unlike other parts of Prussia): The safest thing would be to call him a Prussian, but as I said, there wasn't even citizenship in our sense of the word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.203.60.22 ( talk) 01:12, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
If we want to educate readers about inventions and discoveries with disputed origin or multiple origins, you can make a List of disputed inventions or List of inventions with multiple origins. One of the worst intellectual crimes that Wikipedia regularly commits is to dumb down ambiguity for the sake of generating encyclopedia content. Not everything in life can be shoehorned into a simple list. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 19:55, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
I think, if the mothers surname is "Watzenrode" then this iss enough evidence, that Copernicus should be listed in this list. 178.3.28.185 ( talk) 21:48, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
sure Nicolaus Copernicus is from German descent. In Germany you can find in honour of Copernicus schools with Copernicus as name. TimmaFanta ( talk) 23:40, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
(personal attack removed)
LSD - invented by Albert Hofmann Hoschdi ( talk) 12:55, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Heroin - invented by Bayer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoschdi ( talk • contribs) 12:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
MikelCat ( talk) 11:02, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
MikelCat ( talk) 11:03, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
178.3.25.83 ( talk) 00:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
188.96.179.121 ( talk) 15:13, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Also missing first worldwide social system:
-- 188.96.179.121 ( talk) 15:19, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Germany has the world's oldest national social health insurance system in 1883. Britain was later in 1911. Also first wordlwide accident insurance in 1884. 188.96.179.121 ( talk)
NOTE: I have restored the above list, it was deleted for being posted by a blocked editor, however the content seems accurate enough to be there (talk page claims are given greater leeway), and could be useful as an aid to adding content to the article. I don't think the insurance "inventions" part is correct though. Anyway, I take responsibility for the reinstated content (See WP:BANREVERT) so it should not be deleted again. Tiptoethrutheminefield ( talk) 03:44, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
As far as handling the Europefan/GLGerman disruptive editor, I think we should keep removing all content they add. This is a long term problem, dating back seven years, and I expect it will go on many more years. This guy doesn't give up. He does lie, and he relies on German language sources which de.wikipeida has repeatedly rejected as neo-fascist/nationalist/loony. That's one of the reasons he attributes every invention to Germany, or various parts of the world which at an point in history were German territory. Which is why if an editor wants to take responsibility and keep them, they really need to check. We've already seen several of the items on this list that are false. If you haven't personally reviewed the sources, I would not promote anything Europefan/GLGerman gave you.
I support the idea of having a list with looser criteria. I think it would make this task much easier and I don't think Wikipedia editors are qualified to judge which invention belongs to which country. Most inventions are ambiguous and these lists make it seem certain. List of American inventions redirects to Timeline of United States inventions. A timeline allows you to include inventions that the country contributed to, or even things invented entirely elsewhere but which had important influence on that country. It's much more maintainable and doesn't overstate the case. But it's a big job that I don't have time for. There needs to be a Requested Move to move all the List of X inventions/discoveries to Timeline of X inventions/discoveries. But until that happens, this list should only contain inventions which high-quality sources have shown strong consensus for. All the questionable ones should be left out. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 16:42, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
To be perfectly honest: Who gives a flying f*** which "country" was the home of this or that "invention"? We're living in a globalised world now and "countries" don't mean all that much. We're one mankind, one planet, one civilization to innovate. We need to cooperate. It may sound pathetic, but it's reality in 2014. Cheers and have a good time on Earth, Horst-schlaemma ( talk) 20:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
I support what both Horst-schlaemma and Tiptoethrutheminefield are saying, but to do it we must first change the title of this list, and many others, to Timeline. If you keep the title "List of German inventions", then you have to write an introduction full of disclaimers which basically says the list isn't really what the title says it is. Confusing! And many readers won't read it or understand it. And there will be future debates over the true meaning of the title, so there will be more debates just like this again and again. With American inventions they've found a wonderful solution by sticking with a timeline, which is much less controversial.
But until the list titles and list definitions change to timelines, then we are forced continue only including "inventions that are unambiguously attributed to one country," as I said before. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 21:25, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
I wouldn't be bothered if this article's title included "timeline", I think that's a good proposal that'd avoid many tedious disclaimers and discussions. Prost, Horst-schlaemma ( talk) 22:10, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
A complex theory like continental drift is exactly the sort of thing that develops over time, with contributions by many thinkers building toward a scientific consensus. It's exactly the kind of thing which has no business being labeled a "German discovery". Or a Scottish discovery. If there were strong agreement among historians that this was a German discovery, the would say so, and you wouldn't have to hunt to find these sources. Leaving continental drift off this list causes no harm and misleads no one. When you have Wikipedia editors trying to stitch together clues from multiple sources and comparing dates of publication to establish precedences, all that kind of stuff, that's original research. The NOR policy means we should be looking for sources that clearly say, "continental drift is a German discovery". If the sources don't say that, then leave it off. This is why Europefan's "contributions" are disruptive: at best he wastes our time, when he's not making articles worse. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 19:46, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
I don't have a solution today. At some future date, when I have the time to see it through, I would like to start an RfC and try to straighten this out, but for now I don't see a way to resolve these questions on this list. I give up. Maybe seek an uninvolved editor who can suggest what to do. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 00:34, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
If the ethnicity of the inventor is known, and there is an article about that invention, surely that's enough?Not necessarily: the existence of an article about something indicates the notability of that thing, but it doesn't always indicate that this thing is an invention, that it can be attributed to a single inventor, and that the thing inherits the ethnicity of that person. Assigning ethnicity to things is just not a useful or even well-defined concept, that's why reliable sources don't do it. As a result we're hosting a bunch of lists where each entry uses it's own made-up inclusion criteria, and which mainly serve as an edit-warring playground for nationalists of various flavors but not for providing readers with any reliable, notable or even clear facts. Not taking them seriously is an option, and I'm actually doing that for now since, like Dennis, I don't have the time and energy to engage in straightening this out. But we should be aware that by ignoring them, we're accepting the damage they to to the overall reputation of Wikipedia. — HHHIPPO 10:45, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
the wikipedia article linked for the hamburger states explicitly that there is no conclusive evidence that the hamburger was invented in germany or by a german so i am deleting this horseshit. -unsigned because fuck you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.73.134.147 ( talk) 17:31, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
remove the bullshit entry about hamburgers as the invention of the hamburger is highly disputed and detailed on the very paged linked. 88.73.134.147 ( talk) 17:33, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Ureawvgwe ( talk) 12:36, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Xerberino ( talk) 19:43, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Bernoiutz ( talk) 20:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
BarbareelasKleid ( talk) 16:47, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
92.76.102.4 ( talk) 12:06, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of German inventions and discoveries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:46, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of German inventions and discoveries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:06, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 03:53, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 14:40, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
The Twain inset quotation must go.
Why? A block quotation like this, as of preface to the main content list, belongs to the category of helping texts called paratexts. These texts orient the reader towards a particular mode of reading or interpretation. For example, Flaubert was sure to add to the title of Madame Bovary a word: Roman (Novel). This didn't stop the Court from insisting to name name, to which he eventually responded convincingly: "I". But countless millions have gone on to read the novel as a well-written story, a classic.
But Twain's comments in this article turn inventions into bombs, bombing germanic and Germans' contributions in all fields for all times. The quotation infuriated me in its present role of denigrating an entire peoples' inventors and discoveries.
This article is objective once the quotation is removed. As it stands, it turns the list into opinion, even anti-German propaganda.
I think we are beyond that, but must work to remain free of this kind of ideological poison, which is unfounded and counter-productive.
As a policy, unless a block quotation placed at the beginning or section beginning in an article helps the reader to understand the article by summarizing its content, point-of-view and meaning, in a neutral manner, they must be avoided. Their placement in a highlighted headline shaded box gives them an unfair power of the text because they own the eye, first and foremost.
I would replace it without delay, but it is locked. In this case, the vandalism is locked in and the Truth locked out.
Wikipedia has been designed to offer an alternative to this system of publication, which is the tycoon's and Fascist's best friend. Torcrane ( talk) 13:25, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Include in the section on ethics and religion "Kantianism" by Immanuel Kant. 62.8.157.130 ( talk) 10:02, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebular_hypothesis credits a.o. Kant for contributing to developing this, as does the German Wiki: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kant-Laplace-Theorie. T 84.208.86.134 ( talk) 01:53, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
The mention makes no sense. Karim's family needed to move away from Germany due to xenophobia, so I am not sure that could be seen as a contribution from Germany. Pier4r ( talk) 17:05, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Hitler 78.86.5.199 ( talk) 10:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
List of elements discovered by German scientists: BabyPerona ( talk) 15:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
1669: Discovery of
silicon by
Johann Joachim Becher
1739: Discovery of
calcium by
Johann Heinrich Pott
1756: Discovery of
aluminium by
Andreas Sigismund Marggraf
1758: Discovery of
sodium by
Andreas Sigismund Marggraf
1758: Discovery of
potassium by
Andreas Sigismund Marggraf
1771: Discovery of
fluorine by
Carl Wilhelm Scheele (Swedish-German)
1774: Discovery of
manganese by
Carl Wilhelm Scheele
1825:
Carl Jacob Löwig discovered
bromine independently of
Antoine Jérôme Balard.
1844: Discovery of
ruthenium by
Karl Ernst Claus
1902: Discovery of
actinium by
Friedrich Oskar Giesel
1828:
Friedrich Wöhler isolation of
beryllium
I'm not entirely sure what is actually meant by discovery. Does observing count or is it only the isolation that is the final and crucial step? Basing this off:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_chemical_element_discoveries
— Preceding unsigned comment added by BabyPerona ( talk • contribs) 15:41, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Raised at WP:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_April_29#Category:Inventions_by_country. Your contributions are welcomed. Andy Dingley ( talk) 12:44, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
How can User:Biker Biker revert an edit, in which Petri dish, Schlenk flask or Büchner flask are mentioned as German inventions ? That's true and for each reader sure, that these chemical instruments were invented in Germany. 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 11:53, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Also Taximeter by Friedrich Wilhelm Gustav Bruhn, Abbe refractometer by Ernst Abbe and Daimler Victoria, the world's first meter-equipped (and gasoline-powered) taxicab, built by Gottlieb Daimler in 1897, were German inventions, that is sure. 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 11:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
And last but not least Copernican heliocentrism and Copernican revolution by Nicolaus Copernicus were German discoveries. Copernicus was a German astronom and each teacher and also normally each person in the world should know who Nicolaus Copernicus was 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 11:57, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
So if noone answer here, i will revert the incorrect edit by User:Biker Biker in some days. 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 12:07, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
A Silesian man is a German man. 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 16:33, 12 June 2013 (UTC) The mothers name was Barbara Watzenrode. "Watzenrode" is a German surname. 88.70.24.37 ( talk) 16:37, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
88.70.24.37 ( talk) 15:10, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
88.70.24.37 ( talk) 15:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Firstly Holy Roman Empire = Germany. That's historical fact. Secondly, it's not "nationalistic" to call Copernicus "German". In this case, as with many, the designation has little, if not nothing to do with national origin nor citizenship. It has to do with ethnicity and ethnic origins. Ethnicity is a much broader classification than nationality. I would not be opposed to Copernicus being double listed in an article on Poles. He doesn't need to be "claimed" by one specific group, if he was a part of both, or it is ambiguous. Perhaps we should be more keen to use the adjective "Germanic" when discussing these historical characters... Presidentbalut ( talk) 13:12, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
As far as Copernicus goes, you should probably go to Talk:Holy Roman Empire and see if you can convince everyone there that the Holy Roman Empire = Germany, and then change the article accordingly. And then go to Talk:Nicolaus Copernicus and have the Nicolaus Copernicus#Nationality section rewritten to only say that he was German. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 15:52, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
The crux of the matter is that the concept of (state-) citizenship wasn't too much developed in those days. Copernicus was part of a German-speaking minority in the state of Prussia that considered itself to be "teutsch" but was subject to the Polish king, because his hometown of Thorn had given up loalty to the State of the Teutonic Order (unlike other parts of Prussia): The safest thing would be to call him a Prussian, but as I said, there wasn't even citizenship in our sense of the word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.203.60.22 ( talk) 01:12, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
If we want to educate readers about inventions and discoveries with disputed origin or multiple origins, you can make a List of disputed inventions or List of inventions with multiple origins. One of the worst intellectual crimes that Wikipedia regularly commits is to dumb down ambiguity for the sake of generating encyclopedia content. Not everything in life can be shoehorned into a simple list. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 19:55, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
I think, if the mothers surname is "Watzenrode" then this iss enough evidence, that Copernicus should be listed in this list. 178.3.28.185 ( talk) 21:48, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
sure Nicolaus Copernicus is from German descent. In Germany you can find in honour of Copernicus schools with Copernicus as name. TimmaFanta ( talk) 23:40, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
(personal attack removed)
LSD - invented by Albert Hofmann Hoschdi ( talk) 12:55, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Heroin - invented by Bayer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoschdi ( talk • contribs) 12:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
MikelCat ( talk) 11:02, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
MikelCat ( talk) 11:03, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
178.3.25.83 ( talk) 00:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
188.96.179.121 ( talk) 15:13, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Also missing first worldwide social system:
-- 188.96.179.121 ( talk) 15:19, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Germany has the world's oldest national social health insurance system in 1883. Britain was later in 1911. Also first wordlwide accident insurance in 1884. 188.96.179.121 ( talk)
NOTE: I have restored the above list, it was deleted for being posted by a blocked editor, however the content seems accurate enough to be there (talk page claims are given greater leeway), and could be useful as an aid to adding content to the article. I don't think the insurance "inventions" part is correct though. Anyway, I take responsibility for the reinstated content (See WP:BANREVERT) so it should not be deleted again. Tiptoethrutheminefield ( talk) 03:44, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
As far as handling the Europefan/GLGerman disruptive editor, I think we should keep removing all content they add. This is a long term problem, dating back seven years, and I expect it will go on many more years. This guy doesn't give up. He does lie, and he relies on German language sources which de.wikipeida has repeatedly rejected as neo-fascist/nationalist/loony. That's one of the reasons he attributes every invention to Germany, or various parts of the world which at an point in history were German territory. Which is why if an editor wants to take responsibility and keep them, they really need to check. We've already seen several of the items on this list that are false. If you haven't personally reviewed the sources, I would not promote anything Europefan/GLGerman gave you.
I support the idea of having a list with looser criteria. I think it would make this task much easier and I don't think Wikipedia editors are qualified to judge which invention belongs to which country. Most inventions are ambiguous and these lists make it seem certain. List of American inventions redirects to Timeline of United States inventions. A timeline allows you to include inventions that the country contributed to, or even things invented entirely elsewhere but which had important influence on that country. It's much more maintainable and doesn't overstate the case. But it's a big job that I don't have time for. There needs to be a Requested Move to move all the List of X inventions/discoveries to Timeline of X inventions/discoveries. But until that happens, this list should only contain inventions which high-quality sources have shown strong consensus for. All the questionable ones should be left out. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 16:42, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
To be perfectly honest: Who gives a flying f*** which "country" was the home of this or that "invention"? We're living in a globalised world now and "countries" don't mean all that much. We're one mankind, one planet, one civilization to innovate. We need to cooperate. It may sound pathetic, but it's reality in 2014. Cheers and have a good time on Earth, Horst-schlaemma ( talk) 20:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
I support what both Horst-schlaemma and Tiptoethrutheminefield are saying, but to do it we must first change the title of this list, and many others, to Timeline. If you keep the title "List of German inventions", then you have to write an introduction full of disclaimers which basically says the list isn't really what the title says it is. Confusing! And many readers won't read it or understand it. And there will be future debates over the true meaning of the title, so there will be more debates just like this again and again. With American inventions they've found a wonderful solution by sticking with a timeline, which is much less controversial.
But until the list titles and list definitions change to timelines, then we are forced continue only including "inventions that are unambiguously attributed to one country," as I said before. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 21:25, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
I wouldn't be bothered if this article's title included "timeline", I think that's a good proposal that'd avoid many tedious disclaimers and discussions. Prost, Horst-schlaemma ( talk) 22:10, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
A complex theory like continental drift is exactly the sort of thing that develops over time, with contributions by many thinkers building toward a scientific consensus. It's exactly the kind of thing which has no business being labeled a "German discovery". Or a Scottish discovery. If there were strong agreement among historians that this was a German discovery, the would say so, and you wouldn't have to hunt to find these sources. Leaving continental drift off this list causes no harm and misleads no one. When you have Wikipedia editors trying to stitch together clues from multiple sources and comparing dates of publication to establish precedences, all that kind of stuff, that's original research. The NOR policy means we should be looking for sources that clearly say, "continental drift is a German discovery". If the sources don't say that, then leave it off. This is why Europefan's "contributions" are disruptive: at best he wastes our time, when he's not making articles worse. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 19:46, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
I don't have a solution today. At some future date, when I have the time to see it through, I would like to start an RfC and try to straighten this out, but for now I don't see a way to resolve these questions on this list. I give up. Maybe seek an uninvolved editor who can suggest what to do. -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 00:34, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
If the ethnicity of the inventor is known, and there is an article about that invention, surely that's enough?Not necessarily: the existence of an article about something indicates the notability of that thing, but it doesn't always indicate that this thing is an invention, that it can be attributed to a single inventor, and that the thing inherits the ethnicity of that person. Assigning ethnicity to things is just not a useful or even well-defined concept, that's why reliable sources don't do it. As a result we're hosting a bunch of lists where each entry uses it's own made-up inclusion criteria, and which mainly serve as an edit-warring playground for nationalists of various flavors but not for providing readers with any reliable, notable or even clear facts. Not taking them seriously is an option, and I'm actually doing that for now since, like Dennis, I don't have the time and energy to engage in straightening this out. But we should be aware that by ignoring them, we're accepting the damage they to to the overall reputation of Wikipedia. — HHHIPPO 10:45, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
the wikipedia article linked for the hamburger states explicitly that there is no conclusive evidence that the hamburger was invented in germany or by a german so i am deleting this horseshit. -unsigned because fuck you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.73.134.147 ( talk) 17:31, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
remove the bullshit entry about hamburgers as the invention of the hamburger is highly disputed and detailed on the very paged linked. 88.73.134.147 ( talk) 17:33, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Ureawvgwe ( talk) 12:36, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Xerberino ( talk) 19:43, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Bernoiutz ( talk) 20:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
BarbareelasKleid ( talk) 16:47, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
92.76.102.4 ( talk) 12:06, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of German inventions and discoveries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:46, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of German inventions and discoveries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:06, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 03:53, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 14:40, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
The Twain inset quotation must go.
Why? A block quotation like this, as of preface to the main content list, belongs to the category of helping texts called paratexts. These texts orient the reader towards a particular mode of reading or interpretation. For example, Flaubert was sure to add to the title of Madame Bovary a word: Roman (Novel). This didn't stop the Court from insisting to name name, to which he eventually responded convincingly: "I". But countless millions have gone on to read the novel as a well-written story, a classic.
But Twain's comments in this article turn inventions into bombs, bombing germanic and Germans' contributions in all fields for all times. The quotation infuriated me in its present role of denigrating an entire peoples' inventors and discoveries.
This article is objective once the quotation is removed. As it stands, it turns the list into opinion, even anti-German propaganda.
I think we are beyond that, but must work to remain free of this kind of ideological poison, which is unfounded and counter-productive.
As a policy, unless a block quotation placed at the beginning or section beginning in an article helps the reader to understand the article by summarizing its content, point-of-view and meaning, in a neutral manner, they must be avoided. Their placement in a highlighted headline shaded box gives them an unfair power of the text because they own the eye, first and foremost.
I would replace it without delay, but it is locked. In this case, the vandalism is locked in and the Truth locked out.
Wikipedia has been designed to offer an alternative to this system of publication, which is the tycoon's and Fascist's best friend. Torcrane ( talk) 13:25, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Include in the section on ethics and religion "Kantianism" by Immanuel Kant. 62.8.157.130 ( talk) 10:02, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebular_hypothesis credits a.o. Kant for contributing to developing this, as does the German Wiki: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kant-Laplace-Theorie. T 84.208.86.134 ( talk) 01:53, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
The mention makes no sense. Karim's family needed to move away from Germany due to xenophobia, so I am not sure that could be seen as a contribution from Germany. Pier4r ( talk) 17:05, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Hitler 78.86.5.199 ( talk) 10:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
List of elements discovered by German scientists: BabyPerona ( talk) 15:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
1669: Discovery of
silicon by
Johann Joachim Becher
1739: Discovery of
calcium by
Johann Heinrich Pott
1756: Discovery of
aluminium by
Andreas Sigismund Marggraf
1758: Discovery of
sodium by
Andreas Sigismund Marggraf
1758: Discovery of
potassium by
Andreas Sigismund Marggraf
1771: Discovery of
fluorine by
Carl Wilhelm Scheele (Swedish-German)
1774: Discovery of
manganese by
Carl Wilhelm Scheele
1825:
Carl Jacob Löwig discovered
bromine independently of
Antoine Jérôme Balard.
1844: Discovery of
ruthenium by
Karl Ernst Claus
1902: Discovery of
actinium by
Friedrich Oskar Giesel
1828:
Friedrich Wöhler isolation of
beryllium
I'm not entirely sure what is actually meant by discovery. Does observing count or is it only the isolation that is the final and crucial step? Basing this off:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_chemical_element_discoveries
— Preceding unsigned comment added by BabyPerona ( talk • contribs) 15:41, 4 January 2024 (UTC)