Talk:Germany

Regarding Demographics Section
The paragraph below that is taken from the section of demographics regarding the topic of immigration in Germany illustrates the potential for confusion when the terms 'migrants' and 'refugees' are used interchangeably:

'After the United States, Germany is the second-most popular immigration destination in the world. In 2015, following the 2015 refugee crisis, the Population Division of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs listed Germany as host to the second-highest number of international migrants worldwide, about 5% or 12 million of all 244 million migrants. Refugee crises have resulted in substantial population increases.'

This conflation is problematic as it does not address the distinctions between legal and humanitarian statuses of refugees and migrants, and uses them as though they signify the same concept. 78.179.1.222 (talk) 00:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Refugees are a subcategory of migrants; what this section seems to suggest is that this subgroup has driven an overall rise in immigration rates. Do you have sourcing to suggest otherwise? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I think what IP is objecting to is that the statement 'Refugee crises have resulted in substantial population increases.' is an unsourced addition, and editorializing by whomever added it in. I concur. JackTheSecond (talk) 01:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The claim appears to be supported by the following source, and could be supported by additional sources if necessary. What leads you to believe it is editorializing? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * To resolve this issue and try to reach a consensus, let's see:
 * 1- "Migrants" means someone who changes residence and/or condition
 * 2- "Refugees" means someone who are im a refuge, that is, protected by something or someone.
 * Therefore, I really don't think these two terms are perfectly synonyms, however, maybe in a philosophical context, they may appear to be the same in some yet unstudied way, it's a hypothesis, but it can make sense, anyway, that's a good subject, although I agree that, in an objective context, they are in fact not synonymous, but nothing prevents a migrant can be refugee. 177.105.90.20 (talk) 20:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Why isn’t Bonn included in the capitals? As most government buildings are still located there even after reunification
Put Bonn

as the capital as not many people knew it was the capital of west Germany, and many government buildings are still located there Usydydjwhxyxhx (talk) 18:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Bonn is not listed as the capital because it is not the capital - that's an official designation, not based on where government buildings are located. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:17, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, certainly! I've google for Germany cities, and Bonn was described just as "City" properly, and not as capital, I have two hypotheses:
 * 1- Bonn is not a capital
 * 2- Bonn is a capital, but Google is misguiding (what I honestly think not).
 * Any counter-argue? 177.105.90.20 (talk) 20:14, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Population pyramid and religion
@Nikkimaria Why exactly do you find these irrelevant? Especially the population pyramid, which is crucial to understand German society and policies, especially related to immigration.

Moreover, why did you remove the paragraph on the appearance of Christianity and Judaism in the 4th century, and the sentence on the Jewish population's decline after WW2? Shoshin000 (talk) 08:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Population pyramid is not visible and somthing we normaly put in the Demo article WP:COUNTRYCHARTS. As fo the religion section...we do modern stats...this is not a section for history of. because it would be to big and were should we start? WikiProject Countries as per Too much detail. Not seeing how stats for one group from 1910 with no other groups helps. Moxy 🍁 12:02, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * A sentence woven into the context of what is there, on the north-south divide, Jewish re-immigration from Russia in the 80s and... Turkish guest workers? ...would indeed have the potential to improve the section. But not the current edit. JackTheSecond (talk) 12:45, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * What do you propose exactly? Shoshin000 (talk) 13:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Other featured articles of the same calibre such as Manitoba, Australia, Japan include extensive statistics and/or history in their Demographics sections.
 * The near-disappearance of the original Jewish population is something quite significant when discussing Germany... i mean, it's one of the main things they are known for in recent history...right? Shoshin000 (talk) 13:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC)


 * The Holocaust is discussed in the History section. The Demographics section should remain focused on the present day, with details of population history expounded in the more specific subarticle per WP:SUMMARY. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * But what about the population pyramid? To me, it seems crucial, for the aforementioned reasons. Shoshin000 (talk) 14:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Its not visible/readable .....as in cant see properly even when clicked. These belong at an article like Demographics of Germany that is full on non legible raw data charts that lack context or explanation WP:NOTSTATS. Moxy 🍁 14:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
 * as in cant see properly even when clicked
 * Maybe it's related to your display? To me it's crystal clear. Shoshin000 (talk) 09:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)


 * You folks give the impression of feeling sclerotically opposed to any change because it's a "featured article" and therefore flawless. Sorry, but regarding the population pyramid I do not understand your arguments, let alone counter-proposals if there are any to begin with. It's tough to work with people who cannot point a finger as to why they feel opposed to something. --Shoshin000 (talk) 09:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Moxy @JackTheSecond @Nikkimaria hello? I'm still waiting for a more throughout explanation as to why everything I do gets reverted and a possible counter-proposal... or if you have no idea, say it honestly... Shoshin000 (talk) 13:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)


 * The reasoning for this case is WP:COUNTRYCHARTS and WP:SUMMARY. The counter-proposal is the present version. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Great to see the famed openness and flexibility of the Wikipedia community. Shoshin000 (talk) 07:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Honorary titles in infobox
Not seeing why we should list the Vice-Chancellor of Germany in the infobox. We do not metion this honorary title in the article as most country pages dont talk about deputy ministers. Moxy 🍁 12:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I did actually add a mention of Vice-Chancellor to the article. The Vice-Chancellor, in many ways has a ceremonial role just like the president but both also share the fact that they do have duties and rights to certain procedures that they do. The president, chancellor and vice-chancellor are the three highest ranking leaders in Germany and the vice-chancellor is right below the chancellor. The vice-chacellor in many ways has as much power as the president in terms of leadership of the country so I dont see we couldnt list the vice-chancellor. There is no reason to remove him from the infobox other than someone just personally wanting to keep only two highest officials which wouldnt really be consistent with the pattern most country infoboxes follow. MylowattsIAm (talk) 13:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I hope I explained in an understandable way. My first language isnt English (its latvian). MylowattsIAm (talk) 13:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The German president has actual constitutional duties, his signature is required for laws to take effect. (even if this power is never used for anything but technicalities) -- The French and the US have entirely different systems of Government as well. (Example: US-VP has the tie-breaking vote in the senate)
 * I don't know where you're taking The vice-chacellor in many ways has as much power as the president in terms of leadership of the country from, it reads like your opinion to me. JackTheSecond (talk) 13:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Postwar
"The Allies de jure abolished the German state"

I think that should be "de facto" as the Potsdam Agreement clearly treats all of prewar Germany. I'm not aware of any agreement to dissolve Germany legally. 83.1.168.150 (talk) 16:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Seems like sources support the current wording - see for example this. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:39, 6 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Seems the Legal status of Germany is way more complicated, currently a single POV is presented as a fact. 83.1.168.150 (talk) 18:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That article covers a longer time period than the immediate post-war situation, although perhaps the current article text relies heavily on how one interprets "state". CMD (talk) 01:46, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Science and technology
Good morning,

the section Science and technology is vital to German history and present with being a industrial power. So many German inventions can be shared a little section. I think this part is a must have for the Germany page. BauhausFan89 (talk) 05:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)


 * We do not need a section in this article detailing inventions - that is more appropriately placed at a subarticle. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * We need a shorten version to bring peoples attention to the longer linked subarticles. the wide and long history of German inventions and science is a central part of German culture and present day German industrial power. BauhausFan89 (talk) 09:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


 * We already have a paragraph about the importance of R&D - that is sufficient. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The two attempts to add the section were more about individual achievements than the country as a whole. E.g. name-dropping. I would think that a general overview (of the country and its circumstances) with a link to a list article like List of German inventions and discoveries or List of German inventors and discoverers would work better. JackTheSecond (talk) 01:33, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Science and technology in Germany exists, although it has similar issues of being quite listy. CMD (talk) 02:16, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * good point. will work on that. BauhausFan89 (talk) 10:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Religion 2022 census
50.7% Christianity 43.8% no religion 3.7% Islam 1.7% others 2A02:2149:8BC8:C000:FD2F:4B7D:F930:EDFF (talk) 06:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


 * It appears that official results aren't yet available. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Nikkimaria The Census 2022 did not ask for religion. XodoX (talk) 09:04, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Add "Most populous country fully in Europe"
Replace bit about 2nd most populated european country with that 120.19.164.2 (talk) 11:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Wrong European Russia has 110 million people. Undashing (talk) 10:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Second most-populous country in Europe
I do not understand why Germany's population statistics within the European continent is being removed. It is a very notable fact. The European Union is an organization that does not represent the entire continent. This sentence about Germany being the second-most populous country in Europe has been featured in the long-standing lead as far back as 2020.

Only recently, a Turkish editor has been actively trying to vandalize the article. As seen here, he is trying to remove the sentence without any explanation. That too, multiple times. All of this is happening without any discussion. And besides, what is there to discuss? Basic geography and demographics does not matter anymore?

The CIA source used in the demographics section explicitly states that Germany is the second-most populous in the continent after Russia. The lead is supposed to be a summary of the entire article. So why are we removing this sentence about its population within the European continent? How absurd. Or is this "excess" too?

Central Intelligence Agency - "As Europe's largest economy and second most-populous nation (after Russia)...." Swoonfed (talk) 14:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)


 * You are correct that the lead is intended to be a summary of the entire article. But what that means is that not every notable fact can be included in the lead - just a proportional summary. So while there are several demographic rankings in the article body, there should not be several in the lead - just one is proportional. The EU one is a good pick for that because it is straightforward, undisputed, and doesn't require getting into the weeds about what does or doesn't count as being in Europe. However, if you prefer, we could switch that for the world ranking? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * We're counting the European part only. European Russia has 110 million people. Germany has about 84 million people., which makes Germany the 2nd largest. Undashing (talk) 12:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Since the last version by Undashing was ungrammatical (sentence starting with "lies"), I looked up the version of the latest FA-review and suggest we follow the idea from there: Having the ranking after mentioning the number of inhabitants and referring to the EU only. I don't see why we should mention any other country (in this case Russia) in the first paragraph of the lead of an article that is about one country. Rsk6400 (talk) 14:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)