Talk:Helmuth James von Moltke

This article needs lots of work

 * Among its problems is that, although von Moltke was the co-founder of the Kreisau Circle, nothing about the activities of that group are covered in the article. See and other references to rectify this problem.--User:HopsonRoad 23:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I have merged some elements of Freya von Moltke with this article, which may fill in some gaps for now.--User:HopsonRoad 03:28, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Relation to others surnamed von Moltke
The article on Helmuth von Moltke the Younger claims that Helmuth James Graf von Moltke was his son, but, if so, the relationship is conspicuously absent in the article at hand, which does point out the relationship to Helmuth von Moltke the Elder. Was Helmuth von Moltke the Younger indeed the father of Helmuth James Graf von Moltke? Richard David Ramsey 20:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC) Was Helmuth James von Moltke really entitled to call himself Graf(Count)?The only real Graf von Moltke was his great uncle Field Marshall Helmuth Bernhard Graf von Moltke who died without issue therefore the title became extinct.Moreover the Weimar Constitution of 1919 abolished all nobility titles in Germany,therefore his claim is even more feeble.Richard P.van Egneem —Preceding unsigned comment added by Graafvaneg (talk • contribs) 15:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Balfour and Frisby, "Helmuth von Moltke--A Leader against Hitler," Macmillan, London, 1972 shows the lineage, as follows: Field Marshal Helmuth Carl Bernhard von Moltke (1826-1868) was without issue. His brother, Adolf had six children; one was Helmuth (1848-1916), Chief of General Staff; the oldest was Wilhelm, father of Helmuth (1876-1939) who married Dorothy Rose Innes, who were parents of Helmuth James von Moltke, three brothers, and one sister. So, the Field Marshal was a great-grand uncle and the Chief of General Staff was a grand uncle. User:HopsonRoad 00:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Requested Move: "Graf" should not be in article title
Wikipedia naming convention recommends against using the person's title in the title of the article. Since "Graf" is a title, it should be omitted from the title of this article, but noted in the lede. See, for instance Helmuth von Moltke the Elder. User:HopsonRoad 23:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a misundertstanding of our convention, and our practice. We use titles where they are customary in English works of reference, and omit them where they are not; compare Chlodwig, Prince of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst and Otto von Bismarck. If our subject inherited his title (unlike Prince Bismarck, who was granted his late in life) the presumption is that he is usually called by it. But evidence is always preferable to conjecture. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the clarification. Von Moltke's posthumously published "Letters to Freya" does not use the title in the author's name, nor does the biography by Balfour and Frisbee, "Helmuth von Moltke," nor does the book by his widow, "Memories of Kreisau and the German Resistance." User:HopsonRoad 02:10, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The Wikipedia article on the title, Graf, says, "Since August 1919, in Germany, Graf and all other titles are considered as a part of the name.[1]" Since von Moltke did not use this as part of his name, it's inappropriate here.User:HopsonRoad 03:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The proposed title of the article would be: Helmuth James von Moltke.
 * Comment I don't have an opinion on which of these names is the correct article title, however I would like to point out that while only one can be the actual title, it seems to me both are reasonable alternatives and the other should redirect here. I have created Helmuth James von Moltke as a redirect to this page (this does not prejudice the move in any way). --Rogerb67 (talk) 11:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * (Copied from another Talk page by User:HopsonRoad 15:55, 9 March 2009 (UTC)) To answer your other question, since it is the subject of a requested move the safest thing to do is wait until it is finished then abide by the outcome. In any case, what do you mean by "his name was not Graf"? He certainly appears to be commonly referred to by that name . When choosing an article title, Wikipedia doesn't care what his "official" or "legal" name was, but what he is usually referred to as. Usage found by Google books and Google Scholar look fairly even to me, so a move seems unlikely. If you have reliable sources stating he shouldn't be called "Graf", this information can be added to the article.--Rogerb67 (talk) 13:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * (Copied from another Talk page by User:HopsonRoad 15:55, 9 March 2009 (UTC)) Thank you for that last insight, it's true that in instances where he's casually mentioned, people used a title, which didn't legally pertain nor did he apply to himself. It's also true that his widow and principal biographer (who worked closely with his widow) elected not to use the title. So, then it becomes a question of propagating a deprecated practice (in terms of German law and family preference), or going with the flow. Your Google books search suggests that the latter is the preferred outcome in Wikipedia, although I haven't found pertinent guidance on non-British nobility that helps in this matter. User:HopsonRoad 15:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This, for example, hardly looks like a "casual mention" to me. To be honest, I don't really think you have established your assertion that the current name "didn't legally pertain nor did he apply [it] to himself", but even if you did, the naming conventions of the English Wikipedia mean that the common name should be used, and as far as I can see, the current name is at least as common as your preferred alternative. In any case, I haven't actually expressed a preference, and which of these two variants the page ends up at does not concern me, as in my eyes they are both eminently suitable titles. --Rogerb67 (talk) 22:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Von Moltke should not be included in List of members of the 20 July plot
See discussion at Talk:List_of_members_of_the_20_July_plot and "Arrest, trial and execution by the Gestapo" section in this article. User:HopsonRoad 14:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Seeing no dissent, I have removed the section in question. User:HopsonRoad 14:20, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Overstating the case
The following sentence from the section Kreisau Circle heavily overstates the case


 * This included both economic planning and self-government, developing a pan-European concept that pre-dated the European Union by nearly sixty years, summarized in documented resolutions.

The European Union is a direct consequence of pan-European concepts dating from 1946-50 and culminating in the Schuman Declaration. It took until the 1990's for the European Union to be created but the Treaty of Rome dates from 1957 and the Kreisau Circle ideas predate the Schuman Declaration by less than a decade while Schuman himself claimed his concept dated from his university years at the turn of the 20th century.

I am unsure what the best rewording is to put the Kreisau Circle in the right perspective, but 60 years ahead of its time isn't it. &mdash; Miguel (talk) 00:52, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Moltke in Turkey
New verbiage claims, "membership in an unlikely quintet." This needs further elucidation--who were its members? --User:HopsonRoad 02:24, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I have done some rewording of this new passage and confirmed its historical accuracy directly with his son. --User:HopsonRoad 19:06, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

New source
Many thanks, Hopson. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 00:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

tag
I note that a tag has been placed on this article. I invite editors to suggest problem areas either here or using the template in the text. User:HopsonRoad 21:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * There are several missing refs: "Education" has none, "Arrest, trial and execution by the Gestapo" would need at least two (including for his quote), and in "Recognition" ref for award. Regards, --Klemen Kocjancic (talk) 21:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC) (transferred from User talk:Klemen Kocjancic by User:HopsonRoad 17:53, 15 January 2013 (UTC))
 * I have implemented the requested changes and have removed the tag. User:HopsonRoad 18:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Helmuth James Graf von Moltke. 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/20110718230358/http://www.dgwhv.de/wb/pages/helmuth-james-von-moltke-preis.php to http://www.dgwhv.de/wb/pages/helmuth-james-von-moltke-preis.php

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) 13:23, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Helmuth James Graf von Moltke. 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/20150629084822/http://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Reden/DE/2007/06/bm_konrad_adenauer_stiftung.html to http://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Reden/DE/2007/06/bm_konrad_adenauer_stiftung.html

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) 08:41, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Should the article use the title, "Count", in English?
In an edit, User:Beyond My Ken cites a translation of a work written in German to employ the honorific "Count". That represents a fair translation, because "Graf" is often used in German. However, for works that were written in English, I would need to see a preponderance of evidence that he was referred to as "Count" in English. Here are some reasons that I feel that it is inappropriate:
 * His memorial stone does not use the word "Graf".
 * His widow's (Freya von Moltke) memorial stone in Norwich, Vermont does not use Graf or Count as it memorializes her as his widow. She was my next-door neighbor and explained that the family had no claim to either title and did not apply it to themselves.
 * Neither of the two major books written in English about him use the title, Graf or Count: Letters to Freya with introduction and translations by Beate Ruhm von Oppen and Helmuth von Moltke—A Leader against Hitler by Michael Balfour and Julian Frisby. (Note that, while the authors did not use the words Graf or Count, sometimes the book-jacket cover writers did and this is reflected in Google searches.)
 * Graf states: "German nobility, although not abolished (unlike the Austrian nobility by the new First Austrian Republic in 1919), lost recognition as a legal class in Germany under the Weimar Republic in 1919 under the Weimar Constitution, article 109. Former hereditary noble titles legally simply transformed into dependent parts of the legal surname (with the former title thus now following the given name, e.g. Otto Graf Lambsdorff).[7] As dependent parts of the surnames (nichtselbständige Namensbestandteile), they are ignored in alphabetical sorting of names, as is the eventual nobiliary particle, such as von or zu,[8] and might or might not be used by those bearing them. The distinguishing main surname is the name following the Graf, or Gräfin, and the eventual nobiliary particle. Today, having lost their legal status, these terms are often not translated, unlike before 1919. The titles do, however, retain prestige in some circles of society."

In short, he was not a count nor did he claim to be one nor did he style his own name with the word, it's just that some Germans use the term "Graf" to honor Moltke's lineage. Therefore, I advocate retaining the title "Graf" in the infobox, in a nod to German usage.

Sincerely, HopsonRoad (talk) 13:31, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Just to point out that your argument concerns "a preponderance of evidence that he was referred to as 'Count' in English", yet the memorial stones (I presume) are German-language, as is Letters to Freya. Of the information cited, the only actual English-language citation is Helmuth von Moltke—A Leader against Hitler.To further note, if he didn't claim the title "Graf", then it's inappropriate to have any honorific in the infobox or article.  We're English Wikipedia, and so by English naming conventions, not German ones. I can live with neither "Count" nor "Graf", if HopsonRoad can as well. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:14, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I find your argument confusing. The evidence you provide seems to me to clearly indicate that neither Count nor Graf is appropriate. Daask (talk) 19:31, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for responding here. It would be my preference to use neither "Count" nor "Graf" in English Wikipedia. There are many German speakers, who are active here and who expect to see "Graf", since he is often referred that way in the German language. As to memorials, the Helmuth one is in a part of Poland that was part of Germany during his lifetime to be read by visitors of all nations and the Freya one is in the United States to be read by English speakers. Also, Letters to Freya was written in English, notably the introduction—the body of it being a translation into English of Moltke's last letters, wherein he does not refer to himself in the third person. I'll wait for some more input before eliminating the title, althogether. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 19:44, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Given the unanimity of opinion here, I was WP:BOLD and removed the honorific from the title and the infobox. If a different consensus develops, it can always be changed back. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:52, 27 August 2018 (UTC)