![]() | Wannsee Conference has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on January 20, 2005, January 20, 2006, January 20, 2007, January 20, 2008, January 20, 2009, January 20, 2010, January 20, 2012, January 20, 2017, January 20, 2019, January 20, 2022, and January 20, 2023. | ||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
"to avoid any repetition of the disputes that had arisen earlier in the annihilation campaign."
This is sudden information. What disputes? This needs context to show its meaning better. What were the previous issues that had happened? 113.37.188.122 ( talk) 07:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
We had in place for some time that Sonderfahndungsbuch Polen as translating to "Special Prosecution Book Poland". An IP changed it to read "Persecution Book Poland" stating in their edit summary that "Fahndung literally maens search / manhunt". My German/English dictionary also says "Fahndung" translates to "search", as does Google Translate. So I changed it to that. It was changed back by Alandeus who said "The link is to the 'Special Prosecution Book' article. That title would need to be changed first." I really don't think that because a different article is incorrect that this one has to be incorrect as well. Discussion welcome. — Diannaa ( talk) 22:24, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
@ Obenritter:, you speak German, right? What do you think the translation should read? Thanks, — Diannaa ( talk) 23:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Additionally, "prosecution" – in comparison to just "search" – is more typical of the aggressive bureaucratic vocabulary the Nazis liked to use. Alandeus ( talk) 08:07, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
"Robert Michael and Karen Doerr, authors of Nazi-Deutsch/Nazi German: An English Lexicon of the Language of the Third Reich, translate it as "Special Tracing Book".— Diannaa ( talk) 01:32, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Good morning folks. I am the bilingual (German/English) IP who made the initial change in the main article. I have not been aware that my modest change has triggered such an expansive, learned (and good-natured!) discussion.
First, in my view the best referenced translation for Fahndungsbuch is "Ledger of wanted persons". This is the initial proposal by Obenritter above, who also provides a source (Michael and Doerr 2002). Moreover, the equivalent Fahndungsbuch for Britain has also been translated as "wanted list" (Forces War Records. 28 February 2017) and it would be inconsistent to have different translations for the British book and for the Polish book. Finally, I like the fact that "persons" sounds formal/bureaucratic in English (in spoken English, the plural of "person" does not exist, it is avoided by using "people"), which reflects the bureaucratic ring of the German expression.
In summary, the complete translation is "Special Wanted Persons' Ledger Poland / "Special Ledger of Wanted Persons - Poland.
Here are my comments on the other proposals, in descending order of inferiority (pardon the expression):
Especially wanted persons (Forces War Records). The adverb "especially" is a grammatical error, as Sonder- in German is an adjective referring to the search list, not the people in it. As an aside, in theory it would grammatically be possible for Sonder to refer to Fahndung, rather than to the book, but it is inconceivable that the German author had a single search in mind to look for thousands of people, as these people would be living in different locations.
wanted list I have come across this in Wikipedia, but leaving out "persons" robs the translation of its bureaucratic appearance.
manhunt list This is the closest literal translation for Fahndung, but is not used in formal English by the police.
search list Fahndung indeed can refer to a non-human search, typically a search for a car involved in a robbery. Correct but ambiguous here.
persecution list This is my initial correction in this Wikipedia article, as I thought at the time that someone had simply mis-typed persecution as prosecution. So my persecution was a quick fix but with hindsight not adequate (persecution would be Verfolgung in German, which is what happened in Poland, but not what any Nazi bureaucrat would brazenly have admitted to in the title).
tracing list Not a correct translation for Fahndung. Tracing (e.g. Nachspuerung) looks backwards, involving gathering of existing evidence etc, while Fahndung (search) includes looking forwards, involving border checks, roadblocks, house searches etc. in anticipation.
prosecution list This is both incorrect as a translation and worse, actively misleading. The people when caught were largely handed to execution/murder squads, not invariably faced with legal proceedings. Fahndung is a police term, not a judiciary term. Addendum 16Jun2023: Prosecution in German would have been strafrechtliche Verfolgung.
I will check here again in the next few days if you have any language questions, or if we need a longer consensus-finding process. 86.138.165.93 ( talk) 11:54, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
What is this source talking about? Has anyone heard of troop trains? Either the source is wrong, or the source has been misinterpreted; either way, this content does not belong here. 123.51.107.94 ( talk) 22:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
I recently made an edit to the "Attendees" section of this page. There was new material provided with reliable sources cited in support. There were also numerous copy edits that I believe corrected, improved and clarified the content. The edit was completely reverted by User:Antique Rose with no explanation, which violates the guidance in Help:Reverting: "In the edit summary or on the talk page, succinctly explain why the change you are reverting was a bad idea or why reverting it is a better idea ... in the event of a content dispute, a convincing, politely-worded explanation gains much importance and avoids unnecessary disputes."
I realize that Good Articles present a high bar for improvement, but to wholesale ban any changes without explanation or discussion does a disservice to good faith editors. The essay on Wikipedia:Reverting states: "Reverting is appropriate mostly for vandalism or other disruptive edits ... If you see a good-faith edit that you believe lowers the quality of the article, make a good-faith effort to reword instead of just reverting it ... editors often bundle multiple changes into a single edit, such as adding a new section while also fixing a copy error elsewhere on the page. If you object to only part of an edit, consider reverting only that part and leaving the rest alone."
So, I would ask that the reverting editor provide the requisite explanation and reconsider the reversion to determine if there are parts that should be accepted or whether improvements can be offered, rather than being eliminated completely. I also welcome input from other interested regular editors of this page. Thank you. Historybuff0105 ( talk) 22:16, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | Wannsee Conference has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on January 20, 2005, January 20, 2006, January 20, 2007, January 20, 2008, January 20, 2009, January 20, 2010, January 20, 2012, January 20, 2017, January 20, 2019, January 20, 2022, and January 20, 2023. | ||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
"to avoid any repetition of the disputes that had arisen earlier in the annihilation campaign."
This is sudden information. What disputes? This needs context to show its meaning better. What were the previous issues that had happened? 113.37.188.122 ( talk) 07:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
We had in place for some time that Sonderfahndungsbuch Polen as translating to "Special Prosecution Book Poland". An IP changed it to read "Persecution Book Poland" stating in their edit summary that "Fahndung literally maens search / manhunt". My German/English dictionary also says "Fahndung" translates to "search", as does Google Translate. So I changed it to that. It was changed back by Alandeus who said "The link is to the 'Special Prosecution Book' article. That title would need to be changed first." I really don't think that because a different article is incorrect that this one has to be incorrect as well. Discussion welcome. — Diannaa ( talk) 22:24, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
@ Obenritter:, you speak German, right? What do you think the translation should read? Thanks, — Diannaa ( talk) 23:53, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Additionally, "prosecution" – in comparison to just "search" – is more typical of the aggressive bureaucratic vocabulary the Nazis liked to use. Alandeus ( talk) 08:07, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
"Robert Michael and Karen Doerr, authors of Nazi-Deutsch/Nazi German: An English Lexicon of the Language of the Third Reich, translate it as "Special Tracing Book".— Diannaa ( talk) 01:32, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Good morning folks. I am the bilingual (German/English) IP who made the initial change in the main article. I have not been aware that my modest change has triggered such an expansive, learned (and good-natured!) discussion.
First, in my view the best referenced translation for Fahndungsbuch is "Ledger of wanted persons". This is the initial proposal by Obenritter above, who also provides a source (Michael and Doerr 2002). Moreover, the equivalent Fahndungsbuch for Britain has also been translated as "wanted list" (Forces War Records. 28 February 2017) and it would be inconsistent to have different translations for the British book and for the Polish book. Finally, I like the fact that "persons" sounds formal/bureaucratic in English (in spoken English, the plural of "person" does not exist, it is avoided by using "people"), which reflects the bureaucratic ring of the German expression.
In summary, the complete translation is "Special Wanted Persons' Ledger Poland / "Special Ledger of Wanted Persons - Poland.
Here are my comments on the other proposals, in descending order of inferiority (pardon the expression):
Especially wanted persons (Forces War Records). The adverb "especially" is a grammatical error, as Sonder- in German is an adjective referring to the search list, not the people in it. As an aside, in theory it would grammatically be possible for Sonder to refer to Fahndung, rather than to the book, but it is inconceivable that the German author had a single search in mind to look for thousands of people, as these people would be living in different locations.
wanted list I have come across this in Wikipedia, but leaving out "persons" robs the translation of its bureaucratic appearance.
manhunt list This is the closest literal translation for Fahndung, but is not used in formal English by the police.
search list Fahndung indeed can refer to a non-human search, typically a search for a car involved in a robbery. Correct but ambiguous here.
persecution list This is my initial correction in this Wikipedia article, as I thought at the time that someone had simply mis-typed persecution as prosecution. So my persecution was a quick fix but with hindsight not adequate (persecution would be Verfolgung in German, which is what happened in Poland, but not what any Nazi bureaucrat would brazenly have admitted to in the title).
tracing list Not a correct translation for Fahndung. Tracing (e.g. Nachspuerung) looks backwards, involving gathering of existing evidence etc, while Fahndung (search) includes looking forwards, involving border checks, roadblocks, house searches etc. in anticipation.
prosecution list This is both incorrect as a translation and worse, actively misleading. The people when caught were largely handed to execution/murder squads, not invariably faced with legal proceedings. Fahndung is a police term, not a judiciary term. Addendum 16Jun2023: Prosecution in German would have been strafrechtliche Verfolgung.
I will check here again in the next few days if you have any language questions, or if we need a longer consensus-finding process. 86.138.165.93 ( talk) 11:54, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
What is this source talking about? Has anyone heard of troop trains? Either the source is wrong, or the source has been misinterpreted; either way, this content does not belong here. 123.51.107.94 ( talk) 22:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
I recently made an edit to the "Attendees" section of this page. There was new material provided with reliable sources cited in support. There were also numerous copy edits that I believe corrected, improved and clarified the content. The edit was completely reverted by User:Antique Rose with no explanation, which violates the guidance in Help:Reverting: "In the edit summary or on the talk page, succinctly explain why the change you are reverting was a bad idea or why reverting it is a better idea ... in the event of a content dispute, a convincing, politely-worded explanation gains much importance and avoids unnecessary disputes."
I realize that Good Articles present a high bar for improvement, but to wholesale ban any changes without explanation or discussion does a disservice to good faith editors. The essay on Wikipedia:Reverting states: "Reverting is appropriate mostly for vandalism or other disruptive edits ... If you see a good-faith edit that you believe lowers the quality of the article, make a good-faith effort to reword instead of just reverting it ... editors often bundle multiple changes into a single edit, such as adding a new section while also fixing a copy error elsewhere on the page. If you object to only part of an edit, consider reverting only that part and leaving the rest alone."
So, I would ask that the reverting editor provide the requisite explanation and reconsider the reversion to determine if there are parts that should be accepted or whether improvements can be offered, rather than being eliminated completely. I also welcome input from other interested regular editors of this page. Thank you. Historybuff0105 ( talk) 22:16, 5 June 2024 (UTC)