Talk:Görlitz

Page protection
I have protected this page because of a reversion war (which is part of a lager conflict, see protected pages) and restored it to the last version that has not been edited by the combatants. (This does not mean that that version is endorsed in any way, and a different version may be saved if there are valid arguments for or against). Apart from that, the content issues should be discussed here; if and when an agreement is reached, the protection will be lifted as soon as possible. Kosebamse 08:00, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * This is not an edit war. I reverted Wik because he vandalized the page. Anyone neutral person would agree on that if they looked at the page history. I added a fact which no one denies, he removed it because he is a vandal pushing Polish nationalism. Nico 20:19, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Agree with Nico. Wik also in other cases tried to delete undoubted historical facts regarding Silesia or Poland. 82.82.119.16 20:28, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * Nico added the "fact" that Görlitz was "originally a part of the German province Silesia", which is easily contradicted by the rest of the article: it became part of the province of Silesia only in 1815, although it existed since at least the 12th century. Hardly "originally"! --Wik 20:30, Nov 9, 2003 (UTC)


 * Note also how Nico agrees with himself above. This IP is a user who has made only 2 other edits. --Wik 20:31, Nov 9, 2003 (UTC)


 * Note that User:Wik is lying as usual. I invite anyone to check my IP, which surely not begin with 82 (Germany). I even do not live in this country. Hard to accept that the whole community regard you as a vandal, Wik? -- Nico 01:34, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Nico and Wik, I do have an opinion about the content of this page, but in view of the fact that you two have engaged in a reversion tit-for-tat (AKA edit war) I will not let my personal views dictate which version is to be preferred lest one of you accuse me of taking sides. Discuss this with others, make clear why a specific version is better than others, and I will be happy to ask somebody else to change it. The unhealthy thing about edit wars (apart from being bad PR) is that they seduce the contributors involved into a fruitless confrontational behavior where discussion and compromise are called for. I remain convinced that this should remain protected as long as words such as "vandal" are so liberally used here. It is a difference of viewpoints, not vandalism, as others and I have told both of you for weeks now. The cure for vandalism is reversion, the cure for POV conflicts is dicussion and compromise. It would be a great step forward if you two could accept that. Kosebamse 20:37, 9 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Just on a short visit here, and I would like to drop the following comments: After all I don't see why this article should have a different format than the other articles on German towns. -- Baldhur 09:52, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * 1) The article as it is now was written in 1911. We all agree that much has changed since then, so the article should be entirely rewritten (and not only the first sentence).
 * 2) Most articles about German towns have a common structure; see Dessau for example. That town is a good example, since it once was the capital of the principality of Anhalt. But this is not stated in the article introduction. In accordance with the Dessau article the introduction of the Görlitz article could be:  Görlitz is a town in Germany on the river Neiße, in the Bundesland (Federal State) of Saxony. Population: 62,000 (2002).
 * 3) If the combattants agree, one additional sentence about Görlitz once belonging to the historical regions of Silesia and Lusatia may go into the article introduction (without mentioning the words "Polish" or "German" in this context).
 * 4) Then the history section should follow. There it should be stated, that Görlitz was a part of the Prussian province of Silesia from 1815 to 1945. Note that Silesia was a subdivision of Prussia in that time and not a subdivision of Germany. So "German province" is wrong or at least inaccurate. Also state what the town was before 1815.
 * 5) Do not forget the sights, because Görlitz is more than a bone of contention.
 * 6) It should be mentioned (in the history section), that Zgorzelec and Görlitz were a common city until 1945.
 * 7) Let someone else write the article, who was not involved into this at all; I already have an idea here, but I won't utter his name, because I don't want to make him rushing headlong into disaster.
 * 8) If the combattants do not agree with the changes, that will be made to the article, they should agree to raise their objections on the talk page. We don't want to get back to a reversion war.
 * 9) Please remember that Görlitz and Zgorzelec are towns with friendly relationships. It is not adequate to ignore the advances in Polish-German relations. On Wikipedia now everybody has the (hopefully) wrong impression, that Poles and Germans are still archenemies. Probably it would be the best, if you remember, that there are many fields of interest in an encyclopedia. Do a biology or technology article, make something different for some months, cool down a little bit, and then start from the very beginning. (Probably I am naive here.)

I wrote it myself:

Baldhur's version
 Görlitz is a town in Germany on the river Neiße, in the Bundesland (Federal State) of Saxony. Historically it belonged at some times to the regions of Lusatia and Silesia. Population: 62,000 (2002).

History
The date of the town's foundation is unknown. It was first mentioned in 1071. At that time Görlitz was a small village named Gorelic in the region of Lusatia, that soon after became a part of Bohemia. In the 13th century the village gradually became a city. In the following centuries it was a wealthy member of the Six Towns' Alliance, consisting of the six Lusatian cities Görlitz, Bautzen, Lauban, Löbau, Kamenz and Zittau.

After suffering for years in the Thirty Years' War, the region of Upper Lusatia (including Görlitz) was passed over to Saxony (1635). In 1815, after the Napoleonic Wars, the Congress of Vienna decided to make Görlitz a part of Prussia. Thus the town was a part of the Prussian province of Silesia from 1815 to 1945.

When Nazi Germany lost the war, German troops blew up all bridges crossing the Neiße. The redrawing of boundaries in 1945 divided the town, the right bank becoming part of Poland, and renamed Zgorzelec in 1948, while the main portion became part of the German state of Saxony. When the East German states were dissolved in 1952, Görlitz became part of the Dresden Bezirk (region), but the states were restored on the German reunification in 1990.

Today Görlitz and Zgorzelec, two towns on opposite banks of the river, have friendly relations. The bridges are rebuilt, several bus lines connect the German and Polish parts of the town, and there is a common urban management, with annual common sessions of both town councils.

Sights
(I guess this section is less controversial and may be added later.)

External link
Official website

Okay, that's it. -- Baldhur 17:35, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)

It is my impression that Baldhurs version better overall than the current Görlitz article. It would be a good idea to use this as a starting point for discussion. I suggest that those who were involved recently (specifically, Wik and Nico) post their comments here.

I should note that their behavior with Silesia has given rise to concerns about their general ability to cooperate, and that a refusal to help with this, or a return to reversion wars when the lock is lifted, will quite conceivably result in calls for banning. This is their chance to prove the pessimists wrong, so, good luck. Kosebamse 13:22, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC) - I like Balduhr's version. Space Cadet 18:27, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC) -

Baldhur's version is excellent. The conflict with Wik here was also only over a mere trifle (the sentence in the introduction mentioning that Görlitz was a part of the former province Silesia). Nico 06:24, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)


 * I believe there will be not much opposition to this version, but would suggest that Wik comment on this (will ask him to); if he has no problems with this, I guess it can replace the other article and the lock lifted. Kosebamse 07:50, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

_________________________________________ The city shield shown for Görlitz is incorrect. I checked the official city website (www.goerlitz.de) as well as International Civic Heraldry (http://www.ngw.nl/int/dld/germany.htm). The shield continues to be a two-headed Imperial eagle and the Lion of Bohemia holding an Imperial crown. The pretty shield shown in the article is neither the city shield for Görlitz nor for the related Polish city of Zgorzelec. Iacobus


 * That's right Iacobus, and also the reason why I'm going to change it. After all, the entries in the German and Polish Wikipedias have been showing the right coat of arms for a while... Edwing

--

By the way, I'm feeling a bit unwell about the first sentence, stating that "Görlitz ... is a town ... opposite the Polish town of Zgorzelec, with which it was united until 1945."

"Having been united with" sounds like some sort of union that had been preceded by separateness before (like talking about countries in south-eastern Europe that "were united in Jugoslavia until 1990" or something). However before the separation, no Zgorzelec existed, the Prussian town of Görlitz also being called by its German name by the Polish; so it is also logically incorrect since it implies that before 1945, there had been a Zgorzelec that Görlitz could have been "united" with.

Thus, I would prefer this to say: "... Zgorzelec, which was created out of a suburb [or by me: part] of the Prussian pre-war town." Anybody disagree?

Edwing 17:26, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

It was one city which ended up being divided by the border as a result of the Postdam Conference. It is pretty much the same case as with the towns of Cieszyn and Český Těšín.

Norum 06:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

"Historically it has belonged at times to the regions of Lusatia and Silesia"
This sounds strange. Görlitz was always a part of (Upper) Lusatia because Upper Lusatia is a historical region, but Upper Lusatia, or parts of Upper Lusatia, belonged to several historical states like Bohemia, Saxony or Prussia. Even when Prussia changed the administrative borders of Silesia Görlitz was still in Upper Lusatia. 84.181.97.9 08:54, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[Untitled]
Please, let somebody add this to the page (I am new around and don't know how it works, and how to do it, but some of you guys will surely know :) It is a WW I General name : Pavle Jurisic Sturm, born and rised in Gorlitz, and unfortunately, his name is accidentaly omited from the list of its famous citizens. It is on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavle_Juri%C5%A1i%C4%87_%C5%A0turm For us Serbians this brave prussian gentelman is intrinsic part of our history and we would appreciate him mentioned. Thanks!
 * It's all about grammar, the person writing it probably knew that. --42.113.197.213 (talk) 02:21, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Messiaen
What connection can there possibly be between Görlitz and Messiaen?! 83.163.73.142 (talk) 13:18, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * He was a prisoner at Stalag VIII-A which was south of the city. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I have added this context to the list. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:49, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Görlitz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150415003214/http://www.goerlitz.de/de/buerger/politik-und-stadtrat/partnerstaedte.html to http://www.goerlitz.de/de/buerger/politik-und-stadtrat/partnerstaedte.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130819043747/http://dir.icm.edu.pl/pl/Slownik_geograficzny/Tom_XIV/584 to http://www.dir.icm.edu.pl/pl/Slownik_geograficzny/Tom_XIV/584

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:31, 26 October 2017 (UTC)