This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Nazi architecture article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Nazi architecture. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Nazi architecture at the Reference desk. |
![]() | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Wikipedia is not censored. Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image. |
Would be great if there would be an English article about Konstanty Gutschow. Use Deepl for translation. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstanty_Gutschow https://www.ndr.de/kultur/geschichte/chronologie/Hitlers-Hafen-Die-Nazi-Plaene-fuer-Hamburg-,hitlershafen101.html https://www.ndr.de/kultur/geschichte/chronologie/hitlershafen101_page-2.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:B40:2258:A990:E820:A369:6186 ( talk) 11:03, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry but this article needs significant editing. It could be cut for length, and the first half uses opinion that is unsubstantiated in most cases and reads, overall, like an essay. -- Dolyaie ( talk) 09:18, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Very well written, thorough article. Has anyone thought of a FA nomination, or might it be too long? -- Impaciente 08:22, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
It could be shorter. The section on slave labour is too speculative and not close enough to the topic for an encyclopedia article. -- 213.39.207.184 16:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Interesting article. Alexander 007 02:20, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Okay, how long have you been reading at the Nazi Architecture webpage for awhile now ?
Who do we report 69.192.205.46 too for deleting the full Nazi Architecture webpage ??
Report vandalism here: WP:VIP. Alexander 007 18:15, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I removed Category:Nazi architecture from Category:Romanesque architecture and User:Endurance told me:
I read quickly the article and see no mention and no relation to Romanesque. It could be argued that it is a variant of Neoclassicism, but if it is viewed as a branch of Romanesque, please state that in the article with an explanation. -- Error 00:29, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
Since when have the Greeks been the "alleged ancestors of the Germans"?
The Nazi's attempted to create a link between the Germans and the Greeks; however, this was a falsehood. Please read the Nazi architecture webpage for more information.
For a number of reasons, this, to me, reads far more like an essay than an encyclopedia article.
Also unimpressed with this section "Speer's style was assimilating the international 1930s style of public architecture, which was then being pursued as a modernising classicism. This is in direct contrast to Peter Adams's attempts to separate Nazi art from the Zeitgeist and present it as something that can be looked at through only the lens of Auschwitz. This is trying to establish by default a thesis that ugly regimes must produce ugly buildings and such regimes are so evil that everything they produce must be evil or third-rate. The reality was that destroying to build anew was a standard polemical gesture of the Modernist movement and the styles chosen were not unlike the ones being used at the time." Source? Whose scholarship is this? And the "Peter Adams" link identifies his real name as Peter Adam... 81.108.134.217 ( talk) 22:52, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
This is just a quick note to inform any interested parties that many articles related to this one were found to be copyright violations and have been blanked. Specifically, Das Schwarze Korps, House of German Art, Neville Henderson, Zeppelin field, Lustgarten and Thingplatz had to be blanked, and Ordensburg faced significant reversion. It is unfortunate that so much material was copyrighted, and I hope free content can be created to replace the lost articles. Lizard Wizard 05:16, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
As this article is placed in both Category:Architectural styles and Category:Architectural history there is no need to put it into the uber Category:Architecture, which we are trying to cleanup. -- Dogears 00:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Much of this entry is directly quoted from the Scobie text rather than paraphrased or cited in quotations. It should be removed.
This bit needs serious cleaning up. A number of the links link to the same building, and a number of the buildings were built long before the Nazi era.
I wouldn't exactly call Mies van der Rohe one of "Hitler's builders":
I have removed him from the list. Perhaps someone should check the other names. Selfinformation 22:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Why is Fritz Höger in the list? He supported the Nazis and he practised architecture in Nazi Germany, but that does not in any meaningful sense make him a "Nazi architect". Has the author got a source for this? Höger's style was expressionist, not neo-classicist or völkisch. Höger failed to gain an appointment as a state architect under the Nazis. -- 213.39.207.184 16:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I removed Tessenow from the list of Hitler's builders because he never built anything for the NSDAP. "Tessenow [...] did not participate in the construction the the great national-socialists buildings, even though Speer tried several times to obtain his collaboration" in REICHEL, Peter, La fascination du nazisme, Paris, Odile Jacob, 1993, p. 316. My bad translation from french, but the book exists in English. Icitonpere ( talk) 19:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Peter Behrens "achieved success under the Third Reich" in REICHEL, Peter, La fascination du nazisme, Paris, Odile Jacob, 1993, p. 317. Icitonpere ( talk) 19:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
This article is definitely in need of some illustrations... I'm not an expert, but I think an article on architecture should at least provide some examples. Selfinformation 12:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Why does the "contents" frame appear in the middle of the article? Selfinformation 13:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
For the love of god this is a very long and detailed article but there is only one relativly small picture of the top of a piller to illustrate the point!? Come on whoever spent so much time writing the article can most certainly find images of it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.246.51.216 ( talk • contribs) .
I see that there is a call going out here for images. I have some, but here is the issue. One of my books, A Nation Builds: Contemporary German Architecture was published in 1940 by the German Library of Information, NY NY and the other, Architektur Und Bauplastik der Gergenwart by Werner Rittich was published by [as far as I can tell] Rembrandt-Verlag G.M.B.H., Berlin in 1938. I have tried to track down and/or figure out the copyright issues here and am sort of ending up at some sort of Fair Use listing - but i need help on this. So, feel free to pich in, drop me a line or something. Carptrash 18:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
This page reads much more like an essay (which, I presume, it started out as) than as a Wikipedia article. I think the paragraphs and need to be broken up and the wording made less longwinded. Vorratt 22:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
agreed-- Dolyaie ( talk) 09:21, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
I would cite problems that go beyond the "essay style". Much of the language praises the architecture as successful and seems to imply that Nazism (or at least its city planning) would have "worked" just like Roman architecture "worked". That's an interesting point, if someone with expertise can be cited. It doesn't seem to be proper for a wiki article to endorse such a claim. -- Murfmensch
There's a separate article titled "Ruin Value" not linked to anywhere here; I concur with the comment on its talk page:
"I believe it does warrant its own page, however, but certainly the lion's share of the information should be moved here with a "Main article:" tag in its place."
Coughinink 11:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Image:NaziArch2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 18:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:NaziArch3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 18:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:NaziArchBreker2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 18:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:German pavilion 1937.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 22:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
For your interest there is Nomination For Deletion vote for Nazi architecture at Wiktionary. Green Squares ( talk) 09:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
It does not seem correct that marble from the Reich Chancellery was used to build the U-Bahn station "Thälmann-Platz" (?). Can anyone confirm this? EriFr ( talk) 22:32, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I had been working on the German lemma Architektur im Nationalsozialismus and just was asked to compare it with what youre doing here. Seems we have two completely different approaches. I would like ot summarize shortly what seems to be different and ask you for a feedback.
BR -- Polentario ( talk) 18:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Personally, I feel that the article should refer to Hitler as Hitler, rather than as "Führer." I understand that the writer is likely not actually acknowledging Hitler as his or her Führer, but it just seems distasteful, as well as a POV issue.... PurpleChez ( talk) 04:39, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
I agree. Can one just change that or is there some form of approval needed? (new to wikipedia) Bloubok ( talk) 17:02, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
The entire Nazi architecture is actually a kind of cemetery architecture for everyday life. Clear, straight lines with stylized elements united in symmetry. Fire bowls, bows, which are almost always used in crypts. Ornaments in stone that look like coffins of decorative moldings.-- Kanjawe ( talk) 07:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:NaziArch2.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 12:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC) |
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:NaziArch3.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 12:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC) |
The first section, and the three that follow simply do not cite sources and read far less like an encyclopedia article and more like someone's reasearch paper. 68.183.202.217 ( talk) 14:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi all, as the topic is potentially controversial (being related to Nazism, which in turn is considered controversial) and given that for such a long articles there are only about 40 inline citaitons, I've tagged the article as "refimprove" and will add "citation needed" tags wherever I find a potentially "controversial" or "original research-like" paragraph. Hope this will help improve this interesting article. Regards, DPdH ( talk) 06:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
This article is a bit verbose and needs some clean up in the areas of style, grammar and formatting. Encyclopedic style also needs to be worked on; parts of this sound like a documentary. We should at least stick a few "cleanup" templates in here. — ʀoyoтϵ 01:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't think that this sentence - or the tag for that matter- belong.
Any sentence that starts with "may" sort of begs the question, "Or may not?" Carptrash ( talk) 20:49, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Several sentences have a tone supporting hitler and worse some guess what further expansion of the horrid empire would mean. Very uncouth. Very gross. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.21.95.46 ( talk) 06:34, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Will there be objections if I revert all refs to {{Cite book}} format (Harvard style)? Carlotm ( talk) 22:51, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Large passages in this article are copied from Scobie, Hitler's State Architecture and Taylor, The Word in Stone. These additions appear to date from a long series of edits by User:WritersCramp ( 25k 2005-05-28 through 06-13), User:Endurance ( 6kb in 2005-07-06 through -16). Another big block of text comes from the initial version of this article written by User:Rsloch and including no sources. ( 20k, 2004-03-23). A quick look shows that much of the text from these three contributors is still in the article, which was 72k long before I started removing copyvios. That is, potentially (25k+6k+20k)/72k = 71% of the article comes from these contaminated or unsourced edits. This problem was already noted in this Talk page in 2005 for related articles and for this one in 2007. User talk:WritersCramp also shows a pattern of bad behavior, including around copyvios.
I am afraid this means that the article needs to be deleted and started from scratch. It just won't be possible to disentangle the copyvios and text derived from the copyvios from the clean text. Sadly, many other editors have worked on the article since these copyvios were added. But I don't think it will be possible to save their work. -- Macrakis ( talk) 19:04, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Nazi architecture was the unchallenged expression in buildings and city planning of the idea of total supremacy of the Nazi regime over the German Volksgenosse (people) reduced to an obedient and mindless element framed within a military formation. To this end the Nazi regime adopted a rigid, linear, static, symmetric and antimodernist style, overwhelming in its absurd dimensioning, to build a propagandistic, and in the same time pedagogical, eternal stage for the regime celebrations. [1]
Where architectures had to solve more functional and less celebratory tasks, the hyperbolic neoclassicism was usually abandoned for solutions deemed representative of an expressionistic Germanic style: use of stone or, at least, of rugged surfaces, minimization of glass surfaces and metallic element, steep roofs were the main characteristics of this second approach, not related to ancient classical examples but immersed in a so-called German meltpot.
Their efforts were quite successful; in the years 1934-1943 Nazi Germany was flooded by countless new constructions and buildings, and projects about city planning which would have been carried out if only they would have won the war. Certainly the pathological fanaticism in architectural planning shown by Hitler [2] played a significant role: all the most important projects were brought forward by the tasked architect always under the direct supervision of Adolf Hitler. The leading protagonists of the Nazi style were architects Paul Troost, Ludwig Ruff, Hermann Giesler, Wilhelm Kreis, Clemens Klotz, Roderich Fick and in particular Albert Speer who was the first to bring in his projects that particular architectural feature of political belligerence which became typical especially of Nazi celebratory architecture. [3]
- ^ Brenner, Hildegard (1965). La politica culturale del nazismo [Die Kunstpolitik des Nationalsozialismus (Art policies of Nazism)] (in Italian). Translated from German by Enzo Collotti. Bari: Laterza.
{{ cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
( help) PP. 210-233.- ^ Brenner 1965, p. 210.
- ^ Brenner 1965, p. 215.
It's scattered, but it's there in such passages as
It's a bit much sometimes. EEng ( talk) 02:39, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Um, it looks like my concern is the same as the one in the just-prior thread, so I've merged them. EEng ( talk) 02:41, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
And "inseminated with the seed" has got to go. EEng ( talk) 02:42, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Having come across this article as a patrolling administrator at Wikipedia:Copyright problems (after some time ago moving this article from CSD this because it needed more thorough evaluation), I note:
Given that I've verified copying from the books above, I've reset the article to a stub. The general essay-like tone also suggests copyvio. The history had to go because the suspect content was, essentially, the whole article. Further edits also need to be removed, because the article remains a derivative work (see also Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Derivative_works). MER-C 13:08, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Nazi architecture/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
More essay than encyclopaedia article. Would be more informative if focussed on a few significant buildings. Tacitus 20:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC) |
Last edited at 20:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 01:00, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
I added two paragraphs about how the architecture differs from Classism, citing a psychological study that found people reacted differently to Nazi buildings than typical examples of Classism. I also added a section about the context under which the buildings were created. Part of the history of the architecture was that the buildings were built for reasons beyond aesthetics––they were also helping the Nazis exterminate people by providing more situations for forced-labor. It's important to consider on this page because Nazi architecture was not just a style, it was an entire political system. Goldrider ( talk) 09:51, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2023 and 5 May 2023. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Roscoetherooster (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
Amiller2002,
Lilibet128,
Jamiee365,
Addison18?23.
— Assignment last updated by Antje Gamble ( talk) 19:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Nazi architecture article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Nazi architecture. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Nazi architecture at the Reference desk. |
![]() | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Wikipedia is not censored. Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image. |
Would be great if there would be an English article about Konstanty Gutschow. Use Deepl for translation. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstanty_Gutschow https://www.ndr.de/kultur/geschichte/chronologie/Hitlers-Hafen-Die-Nazi-Plaene-fuer-Hamburg-,hitlershafen101.html https://www.ndr.de/kultur/geschichte/chronologie/hitlershafen101_page-2.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:B40:2258:A990:E820:A369:6186 ( talk) 11:03, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry but this article needs significant editing. It could be cut for length, and the first half uses opinion that is unsubstantiated in most cases and reads, overall, like an essay. -- Dolyaie ( talk) 09:18, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Very well written, thorough article. Has anyone thought of a FA nomination, or might it be too long? -- Impaciente 08:22, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
It could be shorter. The section on slave labour is too speculative and not close enough to the topic for an encyclopedia article. -- 213.39.207.184 16:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Interesting article. Alexander 007 02:20, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Okay, how long have you been reading at the Nazi Architecture webpage for awhile now ?
Who do we report 69.192.205.46 too for deleting the full Nazi Architecture webpage ??
Report vandalism here: WP:VIP. Alexander 007 18:15, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I removed Category:Nazi architecture from Category:Romanesque architecture and User:Endurance told me:
I read quickly the article and see no mention and no relation to Romanesque. It could be argued that it is a variant of Neoclassicism, but if it is viewed as a branch of Romanesque, please state that in the article with an explanation. -- Error 00:29, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
Since when have the Greeks been the "alleged ancestors of the Germans"?
The Nazi's attempted to create a link between the Germans and the Greeks; however, this was a falsehood. Please read the Nazi architecture webpage for more information.
For a number of reasons, this, to me, reads far more like an essay than an encyclopedia article.
Also unimpressed with this section "Speer's style was assimilating the international 1930s style of public architecture, which was then being pursued as a modernising classicism. This is in direct contrast to Peter Adams's attempts to separate Nazi art from the Zeitgeist and present it as something that can be looked at through only the lens of Auschwitz. This is trying to establish by default a thesis that ugly regimes must produce ugly buildings and such regimes are so evil that everything they produce must be evil or third-rate. The reality was that destroying to build anew was a standard polemical gesture of the Modernist movement and the styles chosen were not unlike the ones being used at the time." Source? Whose scholarship is this? And the "Peter Adams" link identifies his real name as Peter Adam... 81.108.134.217 ( talk) 22:52, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
This is just a quick note to inform any interested parties that many articles related to this one were found to be copyright violations and have been blanked. Specifically, Das Schwarze Korps, House of German Art, Neville Henderson, Zeppelin field, Lustgarten and Thingplatz had to be blanked, and Ordensburg faced significant reversion. It is unfortunate that so much material was copyrighted, and I hope free content can be created to replace the lost articles. Lizard Wizard 05:16, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
As this article is placed in both Category:Architectural styles and Category:Architectural history there is no need to put it into the uber Category:Architecture, which we are trying to cleanup. -- Dogears 00:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Much of this entry is directly quoted from the Scobie text rather than paraphrased or cited in quotations. It should be removed.
This bit needs serious cleaning up. A number of the links link to the same building, and a number of the buildings were built long before the Nazi era.
I wouldn't exactly call Mies van der Rohe one of "Hitler's builders":
I have removed him from the list. Perhaps someone should check the other names. Selfinformation 22:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Why is Fritz Höger in the list? He supported the Nazis and he practised architecture in Nazi Germany, but that does not in any meaningful sense make him a "Nazi architect". Has the author got a source for this? Höger's style was expressionist, not neo-classicist or völkisch. Höger failed to gain an appointment as a state architect under the Nazis. -- 213.39.207.184 16:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I removed Tessenow from the list of Hitler's builders because he never built anything for the NSDAP. "Tessenow [...] did not participate in the construction the the great national-socialists buildings, even though Speer tried several times to obtain his collaboration" in REICHEL, Peter, La fascination du nazisme, Paris, Odile Jacob, 1993, p. 316. My bad translation from french, but the book exists in English. Icitonpere ( talk) 19:18, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Peter Behrens "achieved success under the Third Reich" in REICHEL, Peter, La fascination du nazisme, Paris, Odile Jacob, 1993, p. 317. Icitonpere ( talk) 19:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
This article is definitely in need of some illustrations... I'm not an expert, but I think an article on architecture should at least provide some examples. Selfinformation 12:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Why does the "contents" frame appear in the middle of the article? Selfinformation 13:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
For the love of god this is a very long and detailed article but there is only one relativly small picture of the top of a piller to illustrate the point!? Come on whoever spent so much time writing the article can most certainly find images of it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.246.51.216 ( talk • contribs) .
I see that there is a call going out here for images. I have some, but here is the issue. One of my books, A Nation Builds: Contemporary German Architecture was published in 1940 by the German Library of Information, NY NY and the other, Architektur Und Bauplastik der Gergenwart by Werner Rittich was published by [as far as I can tell] Rembrandt-Verlag G.M.B.H., Berlin in 1938. I have tried to track down and/or figure out the copyright issues here and am sort of ending up at some sort of Fair Use listing - but i need help on this. So, feel free to pich in, drop me a line or something. Carptrash 18:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
This page reads much more like an essay (which, I presume, it started out as) than as a Wikipedia article. I think the paragraphs and need to be broken up and the wording made less longwinded. Vorratt 22:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
agreed-- Dolyaie ( talk) 09:21, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
I would cite problems that go beyond the "essay style". Much of the language praises the architecture as successful and seems to imply that Nazism (or at least its city planning) would have "worked" just like Roman architecture "worked". That's an interesting point, if someone with expertise can be cited. It doesn't seem to be proper for a wiki article to endorse such a claim. -- Murfmensch
There's a separate article titled "Ruin Value" not linked to anywhere here; I concur with the comment on its talk page:
"I believe it does warrant its own page, however, but certainly the lion's share of the information should be moved here with a "Main article:" tag in its place."
Coughinink 11:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Image:NaziArch2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 18:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:NaziArch3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 18:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:NaziArchBreker2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 18:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Image:German pavilion 1937.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 22:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
For your interest there is Nomination For Deletion vote for Nazi architecture at Wiktionary. Green Squares ( talk) 09:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
It does not seem correct that marble from the Reich Chancellery was used to build the U-Bahn station "Thälmann-Platz" (?). Can anyone confirm this? EriFr ( talk) 22:32, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I had been working on the German lemma Architektur im Nationalsozialismus and just was asked to compare it with what youre doing here. Seems we have two completely different approaches. I would like ot summarize shortly what seems to be different and ask you for a feedback.
BR -- Polentario ( talk) 18:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Personally, I feel that the article should refer to Hitler as Hitler, rather than as "Führer." I understand that the writer is likely not actually acknowledging Hitler as his or her Führer, but it just seems distasteful, as well as a POV issue.... PurpleChez ( talk) 04:39, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
I agree. Can one just change that or is there some form of approval needed? (new to wikipedia) Bloubok ( talk) 17:02, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
The entire Nazi architecture is actually a kind of cemetery architecture for everyday life. Clear, straight lines with stylized elements united in symmetry. Fire bowls, bows, which are almost always used in crypts. Ornaments in stone that look like coffins of decorative moldings.-- Kanjawe ( talk) 07:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:NaziArch2.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 12:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC) |
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:NaziArch3.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 12:17, 3 December 2011 (UTC) |
The first section, and the three that follow simply do not cite sources and read far less like an encyclopedia article and more like someone's reasearch paper. 68.183.202.217 ( talk) 14:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi all, as the topic is potentially controversial (being related to Nazism, which in turn is considered controversial) and given that for such a long articles there are only about 40 inline citaitons, I've tagged the article as "refimprove" and will add "citation needed" tags wherever I find a potentially "controversial" or "original research-like" paragraph. Hope this will help improve this interesting article. Regards, DPdH ( talk) 06:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
This article is a bit verbose and needs some clean up in the areas of style, grammar and formatting. Encyclopedic style also needs to be worked on; parts of this sound like a documentary. We should at least stick a few "cleanup" templates in here. — ʀoyoтϵ 01:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't think that this sentence - or the tag for that matter- belong.
Any sentence that starts with "may" sort of begs the question, "Or may not?" Carptrash ( talk) 20:49, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Several sentences have a tone supporting hitler and worse some guess what further expansion of the horrid empire would mean. Very uncouth. Very gross. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.21.95.46 ( talk) 06:34, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Will there be objections if I revert all refs to {{Cite book}} format (Harvard style)? Carlotm ( talk) 22:51, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Large passages in this article are copied from Scobie, Hitler's State Architecture and Taylor, The Word in Stone. These additions appear to date from a long series of edits by User:WritersCramp ( 25k 2005-05-28 through 06-13), User:Endurance ( 6kb in 2005-07-06 through -16). Another big block of text comes from the initial version of this article written by User:Rsloch and including no sources. ( 20k, 2004-03-23). A quick look shows that much of the text from these three contributors is still in the article, which was 72k long before I started removing copyvios. That is, potentially (25k+6k+20k)/72k = 71% of the article comes from these contaminated or unsourced edits. This problem was already noted in this Talk page in 2005 for related articles and for this one in 2007. User talk:WritersCramp also shows a pattern of bad behavior, including around copyvios.
I am afraid this means that the article needs to be deleted and started from scratch. It just won't be possible to disentangle the copyvios and text derived from the copyvios from the clean text. Sadly, many other editors have worked on the article since these copyvios were added. But I don't think it will be possible to save their work. -- Macrakis ( talk) 19:04, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Nazi architecture was the unchallenged expression in buildings and city planning of the idea of total supremacy of the Nazi regime over the German Volksgenosse (people) reduced to an obedient and mindless element framed within a military formation. To this end the Nazi regime adopted a rigid, linear, static, symmetric and antimodernist style, overwhelming in its absurd dimensioning, to build a propagandistic, and in the same time pedagogical, eternal stage for the regime celebrations. [1]
Where architectures had to solve more functional and less celebratory tasks, the hyperbolic neoclassicism was usually abandoned for solutions deemed representative of an expressionistic Germanic style: use of stone or, at least, of rugged surfaces, minimization of glass surfaces and metallic element, steep roofs were the main characteristics of this second approach, not related to ancient classical examples but immersed in a so-called German meltpot.
Their efforts were quite successful; in the years 1934-1943 Nazi Germany was flooded by countless new constructions and buildings, and projects about city planning which would have been carried out if only they would have won the war. Certainly the pathological fanaticism in architectural planning shown by Hitler [2] played a significant role: all the most important projects were brought forward by the tasked architect always under the direct supervision of Adolf Hitler. The leading protagonists of the Nazi style were architects Paul Troost, Ludwig Ruff, Hermann Giesler, Wilhelm Kreis, Clemens Klotz, Roderich Fick and in particular Albert Speer who was the first to bring in his projects that particular architectural feature of political belligerence which became typical especially of Nazi celebratory architecture. [3]
- ^ Brenner, Hildegard (1965). La politica culturale del nazismo [Die Kunstpolitik des Nationalsozialismus (Art policies of Nazism)] (in Italian). Translated from German by Enzo Collotti. Bari: Laterza.
{{ cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
( help) PP. 210-233.- ^ Brenner 1965, p. 210.
- ^ Brenner 1965, p. 215.
It's scattered, but it's there in such passages as
It's a bit much sometimes. EEng ( talk) 02:39, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Um, it looks like my concern is the same as the one in the just-prior thread, so I've merged them. EEng ( talk) 02:41, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
And "inseminated with the seed" has got to go. EEng ( talk) 02:42, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Having come across this article as a patrolling administrator at Wikipedia:Copyright problems (after some time ago moving this article from CSD this because it needed more thorough evaluation), I note:
Given that I've verified copying from the books above, I've reset the article to a stub. The general essay-like tone also suggests copyvio. The history had to go because the suspect content was, essentially, the whole article. Further edits also need to be removed, because the article remains a derivative work (see also Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Derivative_works). MER-C 13:08, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Nazi architecture/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
More essay than encyclopaedia article. Would be more informative if focussed on a few significant buildings. Tacitus 20:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC) |
Last edited at 20:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 01:00, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
I added two paragraphs about how the architecture differs from Classism, citing a psychological study that found people reacted differently to Nazi buildings than typical examples of Classism. I also added a section about the context under which the buildings were created. Part of the history of the architecture was that the buildings were built for reasons beyond aesthetics––they were also helping the Nazis exterminate people by providing more situations for forced-labor. It's important to consider on this page because Nazi architecture was not just a style, it was an entire political system. Goldrider ( talk) 09:51, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2023 and 5 May 2023. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Roscoetherooster (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
Amiller2002,
Lilibet128,
Jamiee365,
Addison18?23.
— Assignment last updated by Antje Gamble ( talk) 19:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC)