Talk:Christopher Clark

Publications
Many more publications than that. Took a 30 second search on Google Scholar. DGG 18:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 30 seconds, that is fast. How do you tell google to distinguish him from other persons with the same name, at least one of them also a historian?  --Austrian (talk) 14:06, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Deutschland Saga
I think this could be mentioned too. http://www.zdf.de/terra-x/deutschland-saga-ueber-deutsche-tradition-und-mentalitaet-mit-christopher-clark-35718358.html Taksen (talk) 07:03, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Article name
He is overwhelmingly referred to as Christopher Clark, this Cambridge page is pretty much the only source using "Chris" three times, but also "Christopher". I suggest to move the article back whence it came, to Christopher Clark. This is the name all other Wikipedia languages use. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:58, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * PS: He is definitely not called "Sir Chris Clark", as the infobox now states; it should be "Sir Christopher Clark". -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:28, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I second that; Christopher or Christopher M. is what appears on all (?) of his books. Ziko (talk) 15:12, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Trouble archiving links on the article
Hello. I am finding myself repeatedly archiving links on this page. This usually happens when the archive doesn't recognize the archive to be good.

This could be because the link is either a redirect, or I am unknowingly archiving a dead link. Please check the following links to see if it's redirecting, or in anyway bad, and fix them, if possible.

In any event this will be the only notification in regards to these links, and I will discontinue my attempts to archive these pages.
 * http://www.badw.de/aktuell/pressemitteilungen/archiv/2010/PM_30_2010/Lebenslauf_Clark.pdf
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=4LPODzLgDVEC&pg=PR4&dq=chris+clark+nina&hl=en&sa=X&ei=jJ-ZUq3eGpLboAT9xoDoDQ&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=chris%20clark%20nina&f=false
 * http://books.google.co.il/books?id=sDg9H-XVm1UC&pg=PP16&lpg=PP16&dq=Nina+L%C3%BCbbren+christopher+clark&source=bl&ots=hIo6V4VWaa&sig=uvZx94TMcYS8foQ8UtnVfqZpo1k&hl=en&ei=HeKOSvfoEome_Abs5vT9DQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:25, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Chris Clark (historian). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150108010029/http://www.caths.cam.ac.uk/alumni/society/london_branch/downloads/Professor_Chris_Clark.pdf to http://www.caths.cam.ac.uk/alumni/society/london_branch/downloads/Professor_Chris_Clark.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:49, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Odd passages about the views of “mainstream historians”
I was struck by the use of of the vague, yet sweeping term “mainstream historians” to present a narrative that Clark was somehow breaking entirely new ground when he challenged the “Sonderweg” and “German WWI war guilt” perspectives.

To my knowledge, the Sonderweg thesis has never been uncontested and, similarly, I am not aware that the notion that Imperial Germany was solely responsible for WWI was a solid, historical consensus (hence the huge volume of historical scholarship on the origins and causes of WWI).

In short, it seems that the article sets up something of a straw man in presenting unsourced and undefined “mainstream historians” agreeing on something that have been hotly debated by historians for decades (Sonderweg/origins of WWI) that make Clark’s contributions seem to be more of a paradigm shift than contributions to ongoing, historical debates.

Hence, I would suggest that these claims about the opinions of “mainstream historians” are either more precisely elaborated and sourced or modified to be a bit less bombastic. Mojowiha (talk) 10:00, 16 September 2021 (UTC)