Talk:Colmar Freiherr von der Goltz

As it stands, our article is unaware that Goltz had a career after 1908, which he most assuredly did. For that reason, among others, I've created a 1911 warning tag and slapped it on the front. Mackensen (talk) 02:55, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Von der Goltz.jpg
Image:Von der Goltz.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 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) 03:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

What is the source of possible assasination of Von der Goltz. I have read many books and articles and never had seen any source that he was possibly assasinated. In fact I know noone assasinated in Ottoman Empire command chain during WW1. Ilpars (talk) 11:44, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

More on his writings and ideas concerning war
Some regard his writings as a foreshadowing of wars of extermination and a military justification of them; this actually needs to be be addressed either confirming or denying these tendencies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.12.203.112 (talk) 07:46, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

There's a useful discussion of his theories in Foley's book on Falkenhayn. Was his promotion to Field-Marshal not part of a diplomatic intrigue - France and Russia wanted him out so he was "promoted" to make him too senior to command troops - or have I misremembered that?Paulturtle (talk) 11:59, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Over-reliance on a single source, and perojative undertones...
There seems to be a over-reliance on this source; Akmeșe, Handan Nezir The Birth of Modern Turkey The Ottoman Military and the March to World I, London: I.B. Tauris

In particular, the implications that Goltz was a 'militarist' and 'social-darwinist' are unfounded in any primary sources of Goltz himself; the opinion of a single historian in a single work in which Goltz is not the main focus. The quotes of Goltz given in evidence of being a militarist or social-darwinist (terms which of course have a 'negative' implication, as well as being vague and polemical in nature) are themselves not out of keeping with standard 'realist' notions of the impossibility of eternal peace etc etc. The notion that wars would become 'total' and about mass mobilization is not by itself a normative desire for such; Goltz in his 'The Nation in Arms' notes that nationalism itself had ended the age of conquest - Germany had not even considered annexing swathes of France in 1871. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.1.100.63 (talk) 15:23, 24 February 2020 (UTC)