Talk:Hun speech

For future reference only
A redirect existed first, which is know contained here: Hun speech. It was moved according to my request. WatkynBassett (talk) 15:37, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Wilhelm II was delusional?
The article currently states that "The "Yellow Peril" had long been a delusional fear of the Emperor". I don't have access to the cited source (Röhl), but is it actually saying that Wilhelm II had mental delusions? If not, a term like this isn't NPOV. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:51, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I have to admit that I somehow introduced this unhelpful term. I re-read the source and the term simply is not there, though it speaks of an "impression of a pathological state". I reformulated the sentence to address the issued, but please check. The relevant passage of the source reads: "The ‘Yellow Peril’ had long been a cause of anxiety to the Kaiser and was the inspiration for his notorious sketch of 1895, ‘Nations of Europe, protect your holiest possessions!’ As a result of the annexation of Kiaochow in November 1897 Germany had entered into competition with Russia and Britain, Japan and America over the future of the vast, dilapidated Chinese Empire, a matter in which Wilhelm II naturally took a serious interest. But the Boxer Rebellion brought out in the Kaiser a bloodthirsty aggressiveness so extreme that it gave many observers the impression of a pathological state."

- Röhl p 74 WatkynBassett (talk) 15:59, 9 October 2022 (UTC)


 * The new wording looks good to me. Wilhelm II was a complex individual and it's not always easy to describe his thought processes. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:17, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Deletion because not "accompanied by a reliable source"

 * ___________________
 * The soldiers who left for China allegedly took their emperor literally. This is how a non-commissioned officer reported the speech in his diary :
 * "Es dauerte nicht lange bis Majestät erschien. Er hielt eine zündende Ansprach an uns, von der ich mir aber nur die folgenden Worte gemerkt habe: 'Gefangene werden nicht gemacht, Pardon wird keinem Chinesen gegeben, der Euch in die Hände fällt.'
 * It was not long before His Majesty appeared. He made a stirring speech to us, of which I only remembered the following words: 'No prisoners will be taken, no quarter will be given to any Chinese who fall into your hands.'"
 * Questionably, in the rest of the diary, which has been published in parts, Haslinde does not refer anywhere to the Kaiser's speech, which he only states on page 16 in the above form regarding his embarkation in Bremerhaven. In contrast to this, he also reports - in addition to the "usual" arbitrariness of war - that he and others had taken prisoners.
 * ___________________
 * Questionably, in the rest of the diary, which has been published in parts, Haslinde does not refer anywhere to the Kaiser's speech, which he only states on page 16 in the above form regarding his embarkation in Bremerhaven. In contrast to this, he also reports - in addition to the "usual" arbitrariness of war - that he and others had taken prisoners.
 * ___________________

By "chance" i got hands on this book and had read through it. It's not imagible why the other academic sources - who refers to Haslindes diary release and thus alledgly had read through it - aren't competent enough to detect the amalgination of dubious statments and missing verifying statements in Haslindes diary? Mayby incompetence? Mayby other factors? KR 95.112.76.92 (talk) 03:06, 17 February 2024 (UTC)