Talk:Charlotte von Kirschbaum

Talk about euphemisms!
This article contains the following astounding passage:


 * Charlotte von Kirschbaum's presence in the Barth household resulted in duress in the family at times, and has been a matter of vast speculation,[7] speculation that was confirmed by the release of many personal letters between Barth and Kirschbaum in 2017.[8] However, after Karl Barth had died, Nelly Barth continued to visit Charlotte von Kirschbaum in the hospital.[9]

What does this tell me, the reader?

In 2017, "many personal letters" were released, and these letters "confirmed" something. What was confirmed? "Vast speculation." The article doesn't tell me what this speculation was about: perhaps Kirschbaum was secretly the author of Barth's books? perhaps Kirschbaum was the heir to the Romanov dynasty? perhaps Kirscbaum had a great temper? perhaps Kirschbaum poisoned Barth? (For a moment, I wondered if the speculation concerned an affair, but that's absurd -- surely such a run-of-the-mill occurrence would be the occasion of ordinary speculation, not vast speculation.)

The word "However" is also quite helpful. Apparently Barth's widow's visits to Charlotte are somehow contrary to, or mitigating of, whatever was mentioned in the previous sentence. What might that be? Maybe Charlotte's presence didn't really result in duress? Maybe the speculation wasn't really confirmed by letters?

Wikipedia articles should not be riddles. &mdash; Lawrence King ( talk ) 07:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I tried to clarify the issue with cites and a quote ex the Barth article. Rjensen (talk) 05:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC)