Talk:Anton Drexler/Archive 1

IS THIS WIKIPEDIA'S WAY TO WORK??
I'm still waiting for an answer about Anton Drexler, i Repeat that the title of his work was MY POLITICAL AWAKENING:FROM THE JOURNAL OF A GERMAN SOCIALIST WORKER. I hope that you edit the title and put the correct title and also put that Drexler was also a socialist. I didn't think that wikipedia is so ideologized but probably for a lot of people ideology is more important than the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.233.97.113 (talk) 14:19, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

death
Of what did he die? Drutt (talk) 17:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Good question! I was about to ask the same thing. 216.239.234.196 (talk) 17:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Drexler was not a locksmith!
He was a maintenance engineer of sorts, probably a pipefitter (DE: Schlosser). Someone watching this article might want to fix that. Jim_Lockhart (talk) 12:24, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It states:"...machine-fitter before becoming a railway locksmith." I checked and Kershaw states that he did become a "railway workshop locksmith", page 82, Hitler: A Biography, (2008). So he was not always one, but he became one; I added the WP:RS cite to the text according. Kierzek (talk) 15:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Did it ever occur to you that Kershaw might have been wrong, having followed the common misinterpretation that a schlosser is a locksmith? If not, then let’s look a little deeper into this: What is a “railway workshop locksmith”? Can you find a definition for this trade? If not, what the prudent translator does, is get suspicious that we might have a false friend to hand and look a little deeper.
 * Drexler may have been a pipefitter, a workshop mechanic, or even a machinist—someone who works a lathe or other machine tool to fashion chunks of metal into usable parts. In the days that Drexler lived, there were lots of all three types of tradesman—they were essential to the operation of railroads, especially in the days of steam. In contrast, I can’t imagine what a locksmith would have to in a railroad workshop (a workshop that was probably primarily a machine shop)—can you? (Fwiw, a locksmith—the business that sends a guy around to change your locks or unlock your car when you’ve locked the keys inside—is called Schlüsseldienst in German.) Jim_Lockhart (talk) 08:31, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * What you and I think does not matter, see WP:OR and WP:SYN, so unless one can find another well regarded RS source which states differently; it will not be changed. Kierzek (talk) 13:57, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Have it your way. The German Wikipedia article says he was a werkzeugschlosser, a tool and die maker. If you’d rather have the article be wrong because a “reliable” source isn’t, at least as far as rendering German names of trades in English is concerned, so be it. It’s a pretty minor point anyway. Jim_Lockhart (talk) 15:49, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't mine the change; but it has to be RS cited is what I am saying. You can't change it by OR, is the point. Kierzek (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand. Just pointing out the irony of how rules designed to ensure accuracy can do the opposite. Jim_Lockhart (talk) 06:33, 21 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Kierzek I’m late to the game here, but I wanted to inform you and anyone who might be interested in such an esoteric detail of history that Jim_Lockhart is indeed correct. I was skeptical of his argument that referring to Drexler as a “locksmith” was an error resulting from a simple mistranslation of the single German word “Schlosser” into English.  However, I have since discovered that that word was used to describe Drexler in the Bavarian State Archives.  My source for this is a preeminent historian of Hitler and the Third Reich who acknowledges that instead of using the most common German-English dictionary translation of “locksmith,” the word would have been more accurately translated as either “fitter” or simply “mechanic."


 * Knowing you as I do from previous encounters, it is useless to try to persuade you to allow a correction to be made to our article based on a private correspondence, even--and ironically--from one of the very sources used in for the article! Such is “original research.” Therefore, regretfully once again we shall have to knowingly allow misinformation to stand in the article.HistoryBuff14 (talk) 16:28, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It does say, "railway toolmaker and locksmith"; for something else, please provide a RS source; it is nothing personal, it has to do with WP:RS and WP:V. Kierzek (talk) 22:39, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Is this about Hitler or Drexler?
There is more about Hitler here than Drexler. There is nothing about him here really, who were his parents, was he married, had any kids, what did he do until 1942? What was his thoughts about the war? Did he write anything? Where is he burried? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.103.149 (talk) 17:49, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I added some more detail as to Drexler. However, the fact is, one cannot write about Drexler without writing about Hitler, as well. Kierzek (talk) 01:44, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Was wondering the same. Not too much is known about this guy I guess? Samusclone (talk) 22:34, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Any publications by Drexler or any biography on Drexler?
Thanks. 79.177.14.6 (talk) 05:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Socialist instead of far-right?
An IP is repeatingly removing the word "far-right" and adding the description "Socialist". Invitation to talk was refused. The German page does not refer to him as "socialist". Any sources or comments? Or do we need protection? Nillurcheier (talk) 12:32, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It needs protection, just like the article on the German Workers' Party (DAP) did for the same reason. For example, the DAP, originally lead by Drexler produced a pamphlet in 1919, which "inveighed against the twin evils of Marxism and Jewish finance...called for national revival...under a national government." The Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany (2017), Childers, Thomas, page 31. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kierzek (talk • contribs) 13:46, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

ARE YOU JOKING OR SIMPLY IDEOLOGIZED??
Anton Drexler was a Nationalist, Socialist and Antisemitic and stop. The rest are lies. Why the title of his Work "My Political Awakening: From the Journal of a German Socialist Worker" is not reported for entire and is only reported "my political awakening"?? Is probably because some people don't like to admit that he was also a socialist? I think that you must report the title of Drexler work for entire and also add the term socialist because the same PRIMARY source (written by Drexler) told us that i was also a socialist. Nationalsocialist ideology is called in this way for motive not because they didn't know how to pass the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.20.59.71 (talk) 17:56, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

?
Are you able to conduct a civil discussion or only to hide youself behind what you believe? I Have reported a problem in this wikipage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.233.97.113 (talk) 18:13, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Please get a WP:CONSENSUS for the change(s) you wish to make. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:57, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

The point
The point is that i told you what is the problem and if you control what i said, you can see that is correct. Look at the entire title of the Drexler work and you'll understand that: first the title need to be reported for entire (My Political Awakening: From the Journal of a German Socialist Worker) and second that is necessary add the voice socialist. I reported a problem, if there is a honest admin, he/she should edit the voice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.31.103.166 (talk) 09:14, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Drexler work
The title of the Drexler work is "My Political Awakening: From the Journal of a German Socialist", i don't understend why you don't want to put the full title. The current title is incomplete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.40.93.211 (talk) 11:18, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually, the full title is ""My Political Awakening: From the Journal of a German Socialist Worker", but it's really not necessary to have anything more than "My Political Awakening", as it's not an article about the pamphlet. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:12, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, you've used 3 different IPs to edit the article today alone. Please do not do this. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:22, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

I think instead that is important to report the entire title, because you don't do a proper service if you delete what you want. Also is important because with the entire title you understand that Drexler and his party as socialist root, which he claimed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.237.101.118 (talk) 06:07, 1 April 2021 (UTC)


 * You cannot use sources as you want: delete some pieces, add something and censor some parts. You have to report the correct title and my act is not vandalism is report correct information, because otherwise it's about writing lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.237.101.118 (talk) 06:12, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * In point of fact, the source that is cited -- Kershaw's Hitler: A Biography -- gives only "My Political Awakening" for the title of the pamphlet, so it is being cited accurately. The "full title" that you wish to include would have to be sourced to something else, but even then it wouldn't be appropriate, since the "full title" is the actual title and its subtitle.  It would be as if every time we refer to Moby-Dick we used instead Moby-Dick; or, The Whale, or instead of Gulliver's Travels we used Gulliver's Travels, or Travels into Several Remote Nations of the World. In Four Parts. By Lemuel Gulliver, First a Surgeon, and then a Captain of Several Ships which is the actual, full title of the book. In this instance, the title of the pamphlet is "My Political Awakening", while the title with subtitle is "My Political Awakening: from the Journal of a German Socialist Worker".  Since this article is not about the pamphlet, it is not necessary to cite the entire thing, especially since the source does not.But, as you make clear in your previous comment, you only really want the title listed because you want the word "Socialist" in there to make it appear as if Drexler's party was left-wing, and not right-wing.  Well, I can call myself an acorn as much as I want, but no mighty oak is going to sprout from me, and Drexler's calling himself a "German Socialist Worker" doesn't make it any more true than that the Nazis were "socialists", which they weren't. So, your motivation isn't accuracy at all, it's completely political, based on your own PoV.  Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:42, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I checked my copy (hardback) of the 2008 edition of Kershaw's Hitler: A Biography. The WP:RS cited source gives the title of the pamphlet as stated by BMK, above. Cited to and on page 75 of the book therein. Kierzek (talk) 21:24, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Beyond My Ken, from the answer you gave me you seem more politicized than me, don't use excuses because the entire title is important, are you afraid to admit that some of the origins of the Nazi party were socialists?Your mere opinion is worth nothing, because the truth is that Yes nazi were in some way socialist and some currents within the party were close to socialism, especially at the beginning of the DAP. Also the ideology National Socialism is it is not called that by chance. I know that today the banal world view is between fascists and others, but political ideologies were once a little more complex.
 * P.s. Drexler was socialist,I think he knew better what he believed than you who judge him partially with today's mentality — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.116.33.165 (talk) 17:28, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, no other editor seems to agree with you, so your changes are not going into the article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:54, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * And don't give me any bullshit about you not being political, you changed the description of two Marxist historians to read "Marxist criminal"., Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:20, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Beyond My Ken you are giving bullshit, because you mask your political positions by modifying wikipedia as you want. Obviously no editor agree with me, because you are all afraid to admit that the correct title is that, your vision of the time is black and white and you don't see the shades of gray that were in between. If you want you can buy the book of Drexler and read it or only the title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.30.102.201 (talk) 06:20, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You certainly don;t mask your prejudices, not with edit summaries like "Leftist lives are worthless" and so on. Here's the thing: you have been abusing Wikipedia for a long time by using multiple IPs to disrupt many articles. That's going to stop fairly soon.  Stay tuned. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:44, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * This editor uses many IPs to make their disruptive and vandalistic edits to Wikipedia. One of them left these edit summaries on Battle of Fort Pillow: "ANTIFA SCUM", "MASSACRE YOURSELF", "LEFTIST LIVE DON'T MATTER", and "WHITE LIVES MATTER".  Closing and archiving this discussion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:09, 6 April 2021 (UTC)