Talk:Joseph Goebbels/Archive 3

Goebbels and the Holocaust
A Wikipedia author writes: "The view of most historians is that the decision to proceed with the extermination of the Jews was taken at some point in late 1941, and Goebbels’ comments make it clear that he knew in general terms, if not in detail, what was planned." HE WAS A COMPLETE ASSHOLE

What this author does amounts to circular reasoning. He interprets Goebbels' statement through the lens of the Holocaust, assuming that this was what Goebbels meant -- even though the Holocaust was supposed to be secret and is alleged not to have started yet at that time -- and infers from this that Goebbels knew about it. Basically the conclusion that Goebbels was talking about the Holocaust is derived from the assumption that he was talking about the Holocaust.

The fact that it hadn't started yet is a real problem, because Goebbels referred to something already happening. Our author ignores that.

This application of circular logic involves some biased interpretation of words and statements. Vernichtung, a word often mistranslated as "annihilation" due to the allure of etymology, does not really mean that in the usual English sense. In German it means something more like dissolution or downfall. As for the "eye for an eye" reference, who knows what Goebbels had in mind? That is open to interpretation. Anyway he would not have been saying it to the general public if it referred to a secret mass-killing program, especially one that wasn't even happening yet.

The argument of that passage, that Goebbels knew about the Holocaust and was discussing it publicly before it even happened, is silly and should be excised. HaddingtheGreat (talk) 04:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Goebbels and Kristallnacht
"He was the chief architect of the Kristallnacht attack on the German Jews...." This is a claim that has been widely believed, but is there any real evidence for it? After it happened he called it a disaster for Germany's foreign relations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HaddingtheGreat (talk • contribs) 17:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I changed the text to "he played a hand in". It's a bit ridiculous to call him the "architect" of Kristallnacht when the order to give his speech came from Hitler himself, and there were others (such as Heydrich) actually in control of the police / SA at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Etrann (talk • contribs) 12:43, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Archived Talk
I have archived the previous talk page and it can be found in the Archive section above or at Talk:Joseph Goebbels/Archive2. There are one oustanding issue which has been carried over all other issues that can be resolved have been. The article has changed radically and is well on the way to FA Status. Gavin Scott 17:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Religion
Although Herr Goebbels did have a Roman Catholic upbringing, I don't believe it is necessarily accurate to list his religion as Catholic, as he and many other born-Christian Nazis either renounced Christianity for its Jewish roots or embraced "Aryan" mysticism outright. Is it possible to qualify his religion. Perhaps it doesn't matter, but given the racialistic nonsense Goebbels espoused, his membership in the Church was probably not a high priority for him.

Racialistic nonsense and religion aren't mutually exclusive. But in Goebbels' case I agree, that religion was probably not a mayor factor.--91.37.245.30 (talk) 01:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Having actually read an English translation of "Michael" I have no choice but to differ. In it Goebbels makes it clear he thought the Bible was the greatest thing since sliced bread (pp. 107, 120), that mysticism or religion is wonderful and good (pp. 18, 23, 24, 45, 46, 60, 75-78, 100, 107, 120), that Jesus was the greatest guy that ever lived and that modern Germans were "something like Christ Socialists" (38-40, 44, 45, 46, 47, 56, 65, 66, 70, 74, 91, 120, 127) and that God was so absolutely wonderful that the modern man "is intrinsically a seeker of God, perhaps a Christ-man." (See pp. 12, 13, 18, 23, 32, 35, 39, 40, 45, 48-9, 59, 65, 93, 102). If I were to edit the document I am sure a way would be found to censor the changes. But if enough editors will examine the Amok Press paperback and see this is exactly true, a way may be found to let the less bookish public at least have the facts. translator (talk) 18:55, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

There is no topic heading for Influences, but the usual allusions to Friedrich Nietzche are there. However, no mention is made of Goethe. In "Michael" Goebbels makes neutral mention of Nietzche twice, while Goethe is praised to the heavens no less than eleven times. Which of these writers should be mentioned as the larger influence? Hint: Friedrich is disliked by Christian dogmatists, while Goethe is held in high esteem by the pious. This sort of prejudice seems a poor way to decide which facts to suppress. I would edit the article were I not willing to lay heavy odds the edit would be censored on some pretext or other. translator (talk) 19:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I wouldn't base my claim to understanding Goebbels's view on religion on Michael. That was written in his 20's, and had lots of things that he didn't hold to in later life. If one reads his post 1933 diaries, for example, there is little to suggest any interest at all in being a Christian. Bytwerk (talk) 19:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Either FA or Peer Review
I think that it would be worth either getting this article peer reviewed or pushing it straight into FA candidates list. The main objection would be that it is long, but I think that the subject matter more than justifies the length. Any one else have any thoughts? --J.StuartClarke (talk) 12:44, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Catastrophic
This article is miserable, as is Fest's book. We need a complete review of it; it is true that Irving has been trialed, but this does under no circumstances mean that all of his work has been discredited. Irving's Goebbels biography is among the finest and most elaborate we have, I see no reason why it cannot be used.

Simply because Irving does not display outright hatred there is no reason why his work should not be aknowledged. Declarations of love and hatred does NOT belong in an encyclopedia, articles should be neutral and factual, not the result of some historian's personal speculation. As an example, Goebbels never abandoned Christianity, which several diary entries and phrases from speeches prove; therefore it is unserious to write so in a wikipedia article. The fact that he expressed doubts regarding faith and church can of course be mentioned, but should be done so in a reference. Likewise, the 'Big Lie' quote never existed, all mention of it should thus be avoided.

I request that this article is taken off the 'good articles'-list, and rewritten with an emphasis on Goebbels' official and rhetorical work. His powers were far-reaching, and his influence on the government (Hitler especially) makes a correct understanding of his thoughts and ideas crucial to any general understanding of the Third Reich and the events that shaped it.

And please replace the animated picture with a portrait, and add proper references to speeches in German also. Some photos could be added in the end as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.163.193.66 (talk • contribs)


 * I have, for the moment, reverted this article to the previous version. While there is certainly room for improvement, the revision by removes significant and sourced data, and adds a lot of unsourced material.--Anthony.bradbury 11:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

"Goebbels never abandoned Christianity" - the minute he acted with hate against those people the Nazi party singled out for persecution, Goebbels abandoned Christianity. Anything else he stated to the contrary were simply self-serving lies.98.67.0.243 (talk) 19:04, 2 July 2010 (UTC)HammerFilmFan

Inconsistency
in the beginning of the page (the introduction) it says he allowed his wife to kill his children, but in the "defeat and death" section it talks about how he had an SS doctor do it. comments? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zohyil (talk • contribs) 03:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC).


 * Most sources suggest that the children were firstly sedated with a medication provided by an SS doctor, and then poisoned by Magda Goebbels. The only surviving witnesses from inside the Fuehrerbunker were the secretary, cook, chauffeur and an orderly, and their testimonies do not agree in detail. The chauffeur and the SS orderly were both, self-admittedly, involved in the cremation of bodies in the garden of the Reichkanzlei. It seems likely that, at that time and place, only the SS would have had the facilities to obtain poison, but I would not make any attempt now to defend either belief.--Anthony.bradbury 16:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Animated Picture
Does anyone else find that picture a bit cartoonish. Could it perhaps play through once and then stop rather than constantly animating? I could edit it to do that.


 * I agree! The constant looping is also very distracting while reading the text. After all, the text is the most important here.Mookiefurr 16:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I also agree, infact I may have to remove it! Gavin Scott 20:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I would like one cycle and then a freeze.--Anthony.bradbury 20:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I (Wikipedia consumer rather than editor) agree wholeheartedly... It's incredibly distracting and a friend of mine started giggling when he saw it - definitely too cartoonish.


 * Just my two cents; why does the picture need to be animated at all? what does the animation do that a plain single image doesn't? --MulletManDan 19:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I say replace it all together. Abbott75 09:44, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not even a very good quality. I don't see how seeing Joseph Goebbles flap his arms around twice adds anything more to the article than what a normal static picture does --Hayden5650 08:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I have replaced it, the animation was hideous! Gavin Scott 17:00, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Isn't there a copyright problem with that picture?--Boson 18:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's been on a wiki article Sportpalast Speech for a long time. So I assume when the purging went on this one survived beacuse it was legal.Gavin Scott 18:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Big Lie
While associated, in the popular mind and amongst contemporaries, with the Big Lie concept of propaganda do other people think it is right to mention it in the first paragraph in Goebbel's entry? After all it was Hitler who formulised the concept and indeed it appears that in much of his propaganda work Goebbels was actually more committed to a softer approach, as demonstrated within the article:

'He was, in fact, far from the most militant member of the Nazi leadership on cultural questions. The more philistine Nazis wanted nothing in German books but Nazi slogans, nothing on German stages and cinema screens but Nazi heroics, and nothing in German concert halls but German folk songs....

Goebbels also resisted the complete Nazification of the arts because he knew that the masses must be allowed some respite from slogans and propaganda. He ensured that film studios such as UFA at Babelsberg near Berlin continued to produce a stream of comedies and light romances, which drew mass audiences to the cinema where they would also watch propaganda newsreels and Nazi epics.'

From the Big Lie article:

'Later, Joseph Goebbels put forth a slightly different theory which has come to be more commonly associated with the phrase big lie. In this theory, the English are attributed with using a propaganda technique wherein they had the mendacity to "lie big" and "stick to it"'

While Goebbels frequently made grandiose claims about the power of propaganda I would say the actual output of the RMVP seems to show that he was far more cautious about its usage. Jezze 02:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Also from "Big Lie" article - it is unclear if hitler was advocating the big lie or accusing Jews, etc of using it - the later I assume. A contribtor to the Big Lie article was also unable to verify the quote Goebbels is supposed to have made about the big lie - it appears his quote may be a big lie/fable. If the Big Lie comment in the opening of this article remains it should have a citation of his quote ( or a citation of who attributed it to him - it appears a liar, a big one). Scary how trivia can lead to more and more and more....159.105.80.141 15:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

____________ "Most people are easy prey for propaganda, Ellul says, because of their firm but entirely erroneous conviction that it is composed only of lies and "tall stories" and that, conversely, what is true cannot be propaganda. But modern propaganda has long disdained the ridiculous lies of past and outmoded forms of propaganda. it operates instead with many different kinds of truth -- half truth, limited truth, truth out of context. Even Goebbels always insisted that the Wehrmacht communiques be as accurate as possible." --Konrad Kellen, Introduction to Jacque Ellul's Propaganda, 1965 HaddingtheGreat (talk) 19:10, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Timeline - Plenipotentiary for Total War
"....Goebbels to align himself with the Secretary to the Führer at the end of 1945, thus accepting his subordinate position. When elements of the Army leadership tried to assassinate Hitler in the July 20 plot shortly thereafter, it was this trio that rallied the resistance to the plotters."

This timeline doesn't make sense as the July 20 plot occurred in 1944 and of course the war was well over by the end of 1945. I'm having a little trouble sense of the whole paragraph this comes from. Chronoligically, if the July 20 plot followed Goebbels aligning himself with Borman (?) wouldn't he have been aligning himself at the end of 1943? And the paragraph begins by talking about these political manouverings as if they began in 1944. Am confused! Leonurus 17:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Does it mention in this article that it was Goebbels who coined the phrase "iron curtain" I don't think the article states this fact.

Dbottino 23:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I would have said that it was Winston L S Churchill, during his final administration 1951-55. The comment related to the impenetrability of Soviet Russia, ans was contained in a speech made by him in the House of Commons. I could be wrong. Do you have references?--Anthony.bradbury 23:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Correction - the speech was made by Churchill at Westminster College, Fulton, Missouri, on March 5th 1946. References relating to Goebbels are still welcome.--Anthony.bradbury 23:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Goebbels did use the phrase before Churchil in a 1945 article in "Das Reich": "If the German people lay down their weapons, the Soviets, according to the agreement between Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin, would occupy all of East and Southeast Europe along with the greater part of the Reich. An iron curtain would fall over this enormous territory controlled by the Soviet Union, behind which nations would be slaughtered." The full article is available here: http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb49.htm Bytwerk 03:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Apparently, it was neither. There is more at Iron Curtain and de:Eiserner Vorhang (Politik). It was new to me!--Boson 10:11, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely fair comment. New to me too, but I am happy to accept instruction and correction. I wonder which source Churchill pinched it from?--Anthony.bradbury 10:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Section "Gauleiter of Berlin" And The Death Of Horst Wessel
The section gives an statement that Wessel was killed in a brawl and cites as a source Fest's The Face Of The Third Reich. On the other hand, the WP entry for Wessel gives the following account: ''On the evening of 14 January 1930 Wessel answered a knock on his door, and was shot in the face by an assailant who then fled the scene. He was gravely wounded and lingered in hospital until he died on 23 February. His assassin was Albrecht Höhler, an active member of the local Communist Party (KPD) branch (Höhler was sentenced to six years imprisonment for the assault, but was killed by the Gestapo after the Nazi accession to power in 1933). The KPD denied any knowledge of the attack and said it resulted from a dispute over money between Wessel and his landlady. The matter was never resolved. It is possible that Frau Salm asked her late husband's old comrades to help deal with her recalcitrant tenant. It is also possible that the shooting was revenge by local Communists for Wessel's alleged role in the murder by local Nazis of a 17-year-old Communist, Camillo Ross, earlier in the day.'' No specific source is given, however. Someone more conversant with the subject might want to look into this discrepancy. Hi There 04:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The Encyclopedia Britannica supports your version. Changes will be made Gavin Scott 17:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Newly Added link — Remove?
I'm inclined to remove the link just added to Goebbels's speeches in German for two reasons. First, Wikipedia generally discourages foreign language links. The number of users for whom the link is useful will be small. Second, the site looks to be a neo-Nazi site. Any opinions? Bytwerk 15:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree Gavin Scott 15:44, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. First, Goebbels was famous for his speeches. This invaluable collection of mp3 speeches is not only of interest to German speakers but also to anyone who is interested in this man. Second, there are also speeches from Lenin and Stalin in this archive, maybe a 'communist site'?? Guys, this is a historical archive and as such unbiased. (82.133.126.135 13:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC))

Bytwerk, since you are quoting Wiki rules: "Links to English language content are strongly preferred in the English-language Wikipedia. It may be appropriate to have a link to a non-English-language site, such as when an official site is unavailable in English; or when the link is to the subject's text in its original language; or when the site contains visual aids such as maps, diagrams, or tables." 82.133.126.135 16:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC))


 * I think we can do better than linking to such a questionable site. I reverted your change.  --TeaDrinker 16:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's been a few days now and I still cannot see anything "better than that", ie. a more comprehensive archive, with ad-free, uncommented and easy to download mp3-speeches. If such a site sounds rather "dubious" or "questionable" to you then I believe you are in the wrong community. Last time I checked this site called itself "the free encyclopedia" and as far as I can tell this philosophy has been honoured by most members so far. Come back when you actually have found a site "better than that". (82.133.126.135 11:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC))


 * Review the section on external links: WP:EL. 1. The site is not "accessible" to most English users. If you really want to try to add it to an article, try the German version of the page. If you can't post in German, try an English note on the discussion page of that article and see if anyone is willing to add the link. Second, review the guidelines on reliable sources: WP:RS: "Organizations and individuals that are widely acknowledged as extremist, whether of a political, religious or anti-religious, racist, or other nature, should be used only as sources about themselves and their activities in articles about themselves, and even then with caution." Although I appreciate your kind offer above to give me a few lessons in your spare time,  you might spend a little more time on Wikipedia and figure out the guidelines before becoming too confident of your knowledge.


 * I did remove the link, along with some vandalism by another user. The link itself is not vandalism, which I did not note in the edit summary. Sorry about that. Bytwerk 12:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Truth is the Greatest Enemy of the State
"If you tell a lie big enough...." I cannot find a citation for this famous quotation. Is it in his diaries? Could it be apocryphal? Does anyone know the first use of this quotation in print?

There should be a footnote as to origin, but I am unable to supply one. If no one can, perhaps it should be marked as "attributed to." Lonnie 17:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC) (Lonnie Nesseler)


 * That quotation is a fabrication, and is unlikely to have been something Goebbels actually said. Although he was entirely willing to lie, his public statements always asserted that propaganda needed to be truthful. The quotation is all over the Internet, often attributed to "Joseph M. Goebbels." I've removed it. Bytwerk 19:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Truth be told it sounds like AH in Mein Kampf. I think Goering also repeated it. Gwen Gale 17:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It's also not Hitler, though he said something closer. See the article on the Big Lie. Bytwerk 19:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Its most probable origin is a paraphrase from US wartime intelligence/propaganda. It closely matches what the US government said about him, but doesn't seem to match anything he ever said.159.105.80.141 (talk) 13:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Goebbels 0001.jpg
Image:Goebbels 0001.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Popular culture
During his lifetime and postmortem Doctor Goebbels has been subject to parody and imitation in popular culture. Often he is shown in a negative light and during the War years he was shown as a "malicious dwarf" and evil mastermind. Post-war popular impressions of Goebbels are similar however understanding of his person was changed radically after the discovery of his diaries in the Moscow Archives.


 * In the 1940 short "You Nazty Spy!" and its 1941 sequel "I'll Never Heil Again," the Three Stooges include Larry Fine in a parody of Goebbels.
 * In Charlie Chaplin's 1940 movie The Great Dictator, Goebbels is parodied by Henry Daniell, as Minister "Garbitsch."
 * In the anti-Nazi song released in 1942, Der Fuhrer's Face Goebbels is referred to as proclaiming that Germans own the Earth and Space.
 * During the "Springtime for Hitler" musical production in the 1968 Mel Brooks film "The Producers," a hip, cigarette-smoking Goebbels (played by David Patch) is summoned by Hitler ("Where's my little Joe?") to offer consolation because Germany is losing the war. Goebbels says he has told the German people that Germany has invaded England and that "We beat 'em [the English], baby!" When Hitler objects to Goebbels's smoking, Goebbels tosses his cigarette into a nearby urn, which explodes. Hitler exclaims, "They try! Man, how they try!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.131.77.169 (talk) 00:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * In the 1973 film Hitler: The Last Ten Days, Goebbels was portrayed by British actor John Bennett.
 * In the 2004 film Downfall, Goebbels was portrayed by German actor Ulrich Matthes.
 * The Goebbels Experiment, produced in 2005, explored the life of Goebbels by combining diary entries with original footage of the propaganda minister.
 * According to Stephen Colbert, "Goelbbels'" is the food of chioce for neonatal Nazis (Obviously a parody of Gerber baby food).
 * In the Seinfeld episode entitled The Shower Head, Jerry Seinfeld and his Uncle, Uncle Leo, are conversing at the coffee shop when Uncle Leo receives his food and complains that the medium rare hamburger he ordered was instead cooked medium. He then accuses the cook of being an antisemite.  Jerry replies by jokingly referring to the cook as Goelbbels.

Fair use rationale for Image:Goebbels 0001.jpg
Image:Goebbels 0001.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

His height?
What is the source for his height being 5'5"? That seems quite high, and in fact such a height was within normal range and was not considered particularly "short" for a man born in Central Europe at the turn of the century (anthropologist C.S. Coon in his 1939 work Races of Europe describes southwest German males as being on average 1.69m or 5'6.5"). Goebbels wouldn't have been so ridiculed if he were 5'5". His shortness becomes very evident in photos depicting him standing with Hitler, who is widely recorded as being 5'8"-5'9" (Hitler was above average height for a rural Austrian born at the turn of the century). Here is a photo of Goebbels and Hitler standing together, both have similar size heels on their footwear, yet the top of Goebbels' head is at Hitler's eye level:

http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/sub_image.cfm?image_id=2085

This suggests a much greater height difference between them than a mere 3 inches. Based on that photo, I would estimate his real height to be more along the lines of 5'1"-5'2", which would have been considered below average, and for which the ridicule would "make more sense." (67.149.150.252 (talk) 21:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC))

Lack of source?
"Goebbels told Hitler that "spontaneous" anti-Jewish violence had already broken out in German cities, although in fact this was not true: this was a clear case of Goebbels manipulating Hitler for his own ends."

This assertion is not backed by any reference, and I move that one (or more) be provided, or the sentence deleted. Also, the placing of spontaneous within double quotes is mystifying. If it was not spontaneous, then that can be clarified (as it indeed is), and if it was spontaneous, then the quotes are redundant, and indeed erroneous.

86.133.22.240 (talk) 22:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)SM

In the picture, Hitler is wearing boots with a higher heel. That has an account for at least an inch. The slope of the floor another inch. Abraxas72 (talk) 17:28, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Spelling of his name
Why is his name "Goebbels" and not "Göbbels"? Even in the German article it's "Goebbels".. -- nlitement [talk]  21:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Because that's the way he spelled it. All his books use Goebbels, and his signed his name Goebbels. Bytwerk (talk) 21:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * And does anybody know why he did that? It sounds extremely unusual. -- nlitement [talk]  23:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps he wished to be unusual...or its just one of those things, like some people spell Stuart or Stewart...
 * Why it's "Goethe" or (Hermann) "Boehm" or (Oskar) "Loew". Oe and ö are the same, because loooong time ago the ö was written as oe, later as e above the o and now ö. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.53.85.73 (talk) 20:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I just did a Google search on Joseph Goebbels and Joseph Göbbels to find out if "Joseph Göbbels" is really in use. It is almost nonexistent. I got only 4480 hits for "Joseph Göbbels" vs. 2.26 million for "Joseph Goebbels." "Göbbels" offered as an alternate spelling here is just wrong. HaddingtheGreat (talk) 19:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

a rude picture
I also think the image considered for Propaganda Minister section for Goebbels is a rude one because he is depicted like a mouse. I appreciate the opinions of other.--Bhzd (talk) 14:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure that being rude about someone, when it is properly referenced and adds to the article, is necessarily a reason for removing the image from the article. The image is useful for displaying the sentiment of those outside Germany at the time towards Goebbels, particually the USSR. Efimov is actually still alive today. Since it is likely that a reasonable proportion of his propaganda was only believed inside Germany it is also useful to see what others thought of it in reality. --J.StuartClarke (talk) 12:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The caricature is a very notable view since it reflects how Americans depicted him during the war. Ideally we would have more images related to him, but most are not under free licenses which makes it difficult. gren グレン 19:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Burial?
''The remains of the Goebbels family were secretly buried, along with those of Hitler, near Rathenow in Brandenburg. In 1970, they were disinterred and cremated, and the ashes thrown in the Elbe.'' Where exactly was that burial site? If anyone knows, it ought to be mentioned in the article. Also, hasn't there been a lot of debate over the yeas as to what exactly happened to Hitler's body? --Ragemanchoo (talk) 09:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

"Man of power": Lake Constance?
This might be a misunderstanding as G. had a villa at the small Bogensee near Wandlitz, Brandenburg and - as far as I know - not at the Bodensee, German for Lake Constance. 85.178.134.56 (talk) 10:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Total war's speech
This site: [] has a video with Goebbels making a speech in 1943, about "total war".The sites: [] and [] are also about Goebbels.Agre22 (talk) 13:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)agre22

Edward L. Bernays: I agree with you that as a link it is not sufficient, there should be a little story within the article. Otherwise some people might think that I want to blame Bernays for Goebbel's propaganda - because he has been of jewish descent. This is not the case. -- 83.236.68.205 (talk) 17:41, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

There is no German translation of this book (Crystallizing Public Opinion, 1923) until now, seems as if there has never been. I don't know whether Goebbels read it in english, has he been able to?
 * -- 83.236.67.228 (talk) 09:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Goebbels and the Truth
I removed the edit with this quotation: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State." Although that is widely distributed on the Internet, and in a few books, no one ever cites Goebbels's actual work. On the internet, it is often attributed to "Joseph M. Goebbels." That was not his middle initial. And the source cited credits "Joseph Goebbel," with no reference. Bytwerk (talk) 15:43, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:What is an aryan.jpg
The image Image:What is an aryan.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --03:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorted Gavin (talk) 15:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Painting
There is a fine color painting of the man on the Calvin College website. Does anyone know the identity of the painter? Is a larger version available? It would make a good addition to the article. Drutt (talk) 15:32, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't know the painter, you could contact the siteowner- I've spoken to him before and he is very happy to help with queries. Not sure if it would be needed in this article though. Gavin (talk) 21:54, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

It appears to be a cropped version of a 1938 painting by Wilhelm Pitthan. Drutt (talk) 01:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Vernichtung does not necessarily mean Annihilation
"Annihilation" is not the best translation for "Vernichtung" in Hitler's speech of January 30, 1939, as claimed in a recent edit. If anyone wants the details, I'll write a lengthier disquisition on the matter. Bytwerk (talk) 12:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * actually, it is the noun form of vernichten which means "to make into nothing" or perhaps one might say "to nothingize". It is the German Calque of the Latin "annihilo" which means exactly the same thing, and which became English "annihilation".  Depending on the context one might translate Vernichtung as "annihilation", "destruction", or "extermination", although other words in German also convey those meanings.  Mtsmallwood (talk) 19:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * As Mtsmallwood (talk)] points out, the word has several translations. Aside from the fact that the choice of destruction in the cited passage is that of the cited source, one has to look at the context to determine which way to translate the word.  In Hitler's speech of 30 January 1939, he speaks of the "Vernichtung" of the Jews in Europe, and later in the speech suggests that that will happen in the same way Germany "solved" its Jewish Question — by propaganda and administrative means.  In the context of the speech, Hitler is not suggesting mass murder — and it was not interpreted in that way at the time.  When the passage was cited in 1941 and 1942, the context was rather different... Bytwerk (talk) 21:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi english Wikipedia. The best translations for the words named above are: "Vernichtung" = annihilation, "Zerstörung" = destruction, "Ausrottung" = extermination. Those are pretty similar but not the same. -- 78.94.190.135 (talk) 20:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Image of murdered children
I added the image of the murdered children. It is shocking without being gory, and well illustrates the points made at the end of the article regarding his own children being the subject's last victims.Mtsmallwood (talk) 19:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you really think the children would have had a better fate at the hands of pillaging red soldiers? Their father was doing them a favor. 72.82.235.144 (talk) 18:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Fest Quotation
What purpose do this serve ? Heresay opinion from fest.

As to the picture, the author most have a completed an exhaustive search to find the least flattering one possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abraxas72 (talk • contribs) 03:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

""
"Goebbels, although he continued to show 'leftish' tendencies in some of his actions..."

Like being a Nazi, e.g. Weird scarequotes throughout this article. 153.104.14.73 (talk) 16:36, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Removed Link
The link to the Holocaust Research Project doesn't really meet reliable sources guidelines. And the linked page is headed by a quotation attributed to Goebbels, but one that is almost certainly false. Bytwerk (talk) 20:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation
How should his name be pronounced? I can't quite get the pronunciations guide right? If I understand the Germans, it's Goo-bels, but the English I can't get? My dad says that the history channel pronounces it Gurbels.


 * The confusion comes from the absence of both the character "ö" and the corresponding vowel in the english language. Most english speakers learn the vowel by mixing an "e" with an "r", but then, the american "r" does not exist in the german language. You're much closer with "Pebbles" than with "Gerbils". OttfriedSander (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:30, 5 February 2011 (UTC).

IPA pronunciation
This is given as ˈɡɝːbəlz - i.e. the ɝ vowel is r-coloured - is it true that rhotic accents pronounce Goebbels as though it contained an r? Lfh (talk) 17:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * No. That is not correct. OttfriedSander (talk) 00:38, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, just heard this from both Glenn Beck and Lewis Black on the Daily Show, rhyming with gerbils. — kwami (talk) 02:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I just watched that episode too, and that is why I am here. :) While I would not take Glenn Beck as authority on German names (although he pushes nazi cart a lot), I could believe it might be pronounced this way in English. However, it is still does not make sense, there is no “r” in German spelling, nor in German pronunciation, so I do not know where English got that from. theUg (talk) 23:22, 30 May 2010 (UTC)


 * As usual, Glenn Beck is wrong (and a big fat idiot, but that's a different story). I am a native german speaker, and I can assure you that the name does not rhyme with "Gerbils", but with "Pebbles", like in the Flintstones. OttfriedSander (talk) 00:38, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Quotation about his antisemitic few about jews
"...the enemy clearly says that its goal in this war is to put the total domination of jewry﻿ over the nations of the earth under legal protection, and to threaten even a discussion of this shameful attempt with the death penalty." --79.212.52.15 (talk) 20:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)Robert

Soviet caricature
Does this (probably) fair-use image is worthy of uploading here, what do you think? The author is Boris Efimov and it was first time published in 1943. -- Bojan   Talk  06:49, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, I've just noticed this, but is not same image. -- Bojan   Talk  07:08, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

1970 cremation without sources
Any sources on this? Otherwise it should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.206.18.218 (talk) 12:36, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Citation needed about the fate of their remains
"The remains of the Goebbels family were secretly buried, along with those of Hitler, near Rathenow in Brandenburg. In 1970, they were disinterred and cremated, and the ashes thrown in the Elbe." In section 10 lacks citation. Stories abound over the fate of Hitler and company's remains, this needs to be cited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Napkin65 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Done. Dave Dial (talk) 22:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

1937 attempted suicide
Which "Goebbels" attempted suicide in 1937, Joseph or Magda? Drutt (talk) 10:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Gerbbels
There should be a pronunciation key since his name is pronounced like the aforementioned way, and not the phonetic way.  Blind man   shady  05:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * This is, I am afraid, the German way.--Anthony.bradbury 16:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I always said it. Go-Bills or Go-Balls Gavin Scott 21:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I know it is German, but there is no pronunciation key and there should be. Blind man   shady  18:35, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Blindman makes a very good point. IPA may look fancy and is technically very correct, but very few can actually interpret it correctly. Hardly an ideal situation.
 * Peter Isotalo 04:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Find an online German dictionary that will pronounce it for you. I can tell you that "Gurbels" is a rctarded pronunciation. It's more like Goobels where the double-O makes the same sound as a in look or hook. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.243.21.187 (talk) 04:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

The R should be taken out of the phonetic rendering. The German Ö (or OE) is pronounced like the I in 'bird' without the R-coloring. If you find that sound complicated, U as in 'but' is also pretty close. But there is definitely no R in 'Goebbels', at least not in the German pronunciation of the name. 80.79.32.43 (talk) 15:07, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Above comment is correct. Suggesting that the hard "r" should be included in the english pronunciation is enforcing what is sadly an already common and stupid mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.220.13.2 (talk) 19:33, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

"Genocide of the holocaust" =
Is it worded odd? --24.61.49.27 (talk) 05:15, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Citations Need to be of Higher Quality - Possible promotion for books?
Here is an example (I have not done a run through all, feel free to check others)

His propaganda techniques were totally cynical: "That propaganda is good which leads to success, and that is bad which fails to achieve the desired result," he wrote. "It is not propaganda’s task to be intelligent, its task is to lead to success."[21]

So [21], leads to, Fest, "The Face of the Third Reich" which in itself actually cites Reese, "Case of Rudolf Hess".

Now looking at Reese I cannot get a match for the above claim. Should this be sourced properly or cleaned up? It seems a disservice to the article not to cite original material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.239.45.130 (talk) 04:45, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

why not Göbbels ??
The wikipedia article is Göring. Why then we have Goebbels written without umlaut? Oe is another way to write ö, in german. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.152.161.130 (talk) 22:13, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Because he spelled his name "Goebbels". Bytwerk (talk) 00:08, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Nowhere near Prussia
Rheydt near Moenchengladbach is in Nordrhein-Westfalen.72.92.93.223 (talk) 00:06, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * His birthplace is listed as Rheydt, Prussia, Germany because he was born in Rheydt, which was in the Kingdom of Prussia, which comprised almost two-thirds of the German Empire at one time or the other. For the year in which Goebbels was born(1897), the location is correct. Dave Dial (talk) 00:42, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

russophil
Maybe it should be added that he was one of the "pro-russian" guys in the NSDAP, who respected the so called "slavic race"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.121.54.136 (talk) 19:17, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation
How does someone pronounce /ˈɡɜrbəlz/ in English??? It's right there in the first line. I'm a native English speaking person but I'm confused. Is this word pronounced phonetically as in "Ga-Three-Ar-Be-rotated-E-L-Z" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.58.247.77 (talk) 16:34, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Answered my own question - the international phonetic alphabet: /ˈɡɜrbəlz/in English is pronounced as if it was spelled "Gsbalz". Yes. That's the correct translation from what the article states. No surprise that wikipedia gets it wrong again. Unless there's a rule that states, "'3 after G is pronounced as 'o' instead of 's'". See? I can be a wikipedia admin too... I can tell you what's wrong, criticize and complain, earn barn-stars from other sociopaths, but not bother to help fix it!!! 190.51.139.66 (talk) 21:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Magda Goebbels
Disambiguation is needed. Magna Goebbels maiden name is stated differently in different places on the page. I have taken the following comments from www.fsmitha.com/review/r-meisner.htm, as I do not have access to the book 'Magda Goebbels -- the First Lady of the Third Reich' published in 1980 by Dial Press of NY.

Maden name:   Magda   Behrend      (Born Catholic, Christian convert for marriage, Ideologically Buddhist)

Mother:       Auguste Behrend      (Catholic)

Father:         Oskar Ritschel

Step Father:  Richard Friedlander  (Jewish)    dies Buchenwald concentration camp

Dated:           Haim Arlosoroff   (Zionist)   assassinated in Palestine

First Husband: Günther Quandt

Called:         Magda Ritschel by Hans-Otto Meisner  (Author)

From an early age until she was nearly 18 she went by her chosen name Friedlander. Quandt required her to change it back to Ritschel before their Marriage. I would think she should be addressed as Friedlander, her choice, or Behrend which is her birth name and not Ritschel as she never used that name except on her Marriage license. Pendare (talk) 19:22, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

This article is really badly written
This article has multiple strong statements about Hitler's stances on capitalism but with no sources to back them up. I removed a ridiculously stupid unsourced statement that said that Hitler denounced socialism as "a Jewish creation" - he promoted an ideology called National Socialism, why would he denounce his own ideology? There were numerous sentences stating that Hitler supported capitalism with no sources to back up these statements. I am not trying to say that Hitler was a genuine socialist - I'm not sure what the man really thought, he was literally psychotic - but in private conversations Hitler was noted to be staunchly anti-capitalist - it was capitalism and communism that Hitler did say were Jewish creations. The economy Hitler described as ideal was a mercantilist economy led by the state. Maybe Hitler thought that socialism was just anti-capitalism? Or maybe Hitler was just using the word "socialism" to strengthen support for his anti-Semitic anti-capitalist and mercantilist agenda? But any study of Hitler's private life (rather than his public life where like many politicians he manipulative and calculating) will reveal Hitler in private conversations declared that he opposed capitalism.--R-41 (talk) 04:36, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * R-41, when Hitler uses the word "socialism" here he means that which is akin to Soviet communism. I just re-wrote the section to match the cited source which I checked and addition of detail. It was not correct before. I do agree that this article needs to be checked by main book sources in your areas of concern and more citations put in places that you marked. Kierzek (talk) 13:58, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not see any evidence that Hitler anywhere used "socialism" as a term of reference to Soviet communism. From what I've read of him, Hitler never used the term "socialism" to refer to Soviet communism. Hitler denounced the following terms (some of which he coined): "Marxism", "communism", "Bolshevism", "Jewish Marxism", "Judeo-Marxism", "Jewish Bolshevism", "Judeo-Bolshevism". These are the references he used to denounce both communism and social democracy (because social democracy was founded by revisionist Marxist Eduoard Bernstein who was Jewish).--R-41 (talk) 00:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * To be clear, I said it was "akin" to communism; not the exact term Hitler used for Soviet communism. Kershaw points out that Strasser and the northern party wing "...advocated a more 'socialist' emphasis". Goebbels, as well (at that time). Hitler on 26 Feb. 1926, summoned 60 party leaders to a meeting where he spoke for two hours. His position was opposed to that of the Strasser group. Any alliance with Russia could be ruled out. Germany's future could be secured by Lebensraum. He also ruled out the position by the north German Nazi leaders stating, "For us there are no princes, only Germans; we stand on the basis of the law, and will not give a Jewish system of exploitation a legal pretext for the complete plundering of our people". There would be no "political bolshevization of Germany". I did tweak the section of the article for clarity sake. Kierzek (talk) 01:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Joseph Goebbels in popular culture
Joseph Goebbels, as Hitler's number2 is portrayed in a lot of works and parodies about the nazism and World War Two.

In Charlie Chaplin's The grate dictatore, the charcater Garbitsch portraied by the actor Henry Daniell is a parody of Goebbels. In Bertolt Brecht's The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui the gangster Givola is a trasposition of Goebbels In Quentin Tarantino's Inglourous Basterds the actor Sylvester Groth is Goebbels. Groth portrayed Goebbels in the 2007 German film Mein Führer – Die wirklich wahrste Wahrheit über Adolf Hitler, directed by Dani Levy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.32.180.235 (talk) 11:41, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

In "Downfall" Goebbels talks in a really strange way although the actor is capable of speaking normal German - anybody know what is up with that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.192.95.82 (talk) 23:58, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

"Goebbels manipulating Hitler for his own ends"?
Ive tagged a dubious marking by that sentence. The article on the whole is outstanding, but this I found jarring as a new reader. It could more plausably be argued that G was merely currying favour with Hitler (remember this is near the nadir of his estimation in the eyes of the Nazi establishment) and carried out a political manoevre which he knew was bound to be viscerally supported by H. This is a long way from manipulation, which suggests an opposite view to be overcome, which did not actually exist. There is often a tendency to underestimate Hs radicalism. I suggest the whole sentence be deleted. Its contentious, and unsupported, and the whole section is fine without it. Irondome (talk) 05:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Goebbels Antisemitism
The article stated: "As one of Adolf Hitler's closest associates and most devout followers, he was known for his zealous orations and visceral and homicidal antisemitism." While I agree that he had a visceral, homicidal and hateful antisemitism, I think these words are superfluous. By stating his "deep antisemitism" this is already implicit.Mistico (talk) 20:19, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

No, its not a "gross understatment". Its a question of language. The article clearly shows his deep antisemitism. We don`t need to use more subjective language about it. I am just trying to follow Wikipedia policies of NPOV:. Please read it: "Prefer nonjudgmental language. A neutral point of view neither sympathizes with nor disparages its subject (or what reliable sources say about the subject), although this must sometimes be balanced against clarity. Present opinions and conflicting findings in a disinterested tone. Do not editorialize." To call his antisemitism "deep" already indicates other considerations about it.Mistico (talk) 20:29, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * "Deep and violent" would satisfy me. His public utterances were larded with references to H's so called "prophecy" of Jan 39 promising the destruction of European Jewry. He also used the term "extermin.." and deliberately rephrased it mid-speech in the Feb 43 sportspalast speech. So it was homicidal, but I would accept "violent" Irondome (talk) 20:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * All the leading Nazi ideologists where "deeply" antisemite, like Goebbels, Hitler, Rosenberg. I really think the best way to emphazise his role in the Holocaust is probably to indicate that his deep antisemitism lead him to be one of the mentors of the "Final Solution". This was the direct result of his "murderous" antisemitism. I am adding that to the entry. The entry speaks by itself about the way he saw the Jews and their existence.Mistico (talk) 20:48, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hitlers' anti-semitic drives provided the impetus for the others to act on his percieved and actual "policies" in that direction. G was a classic example. Let us have a look at the new version then. It may well be effective. Irondome (talk) 20:55, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Immunity to prosecution
The article points out that when Goebbels was elected he recieved immunity from prosecution. If he were to have abused this in some way then perhaps it would be important, but is there any reason for inclusion of this minor detail?Retrolord (talk) 22:47, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes there is, and it is not a minor detail since he bragged about it in Angriff. German wikipedia has a source too. German Wikipedia. We might consider editing to include the bragging. --Paul Pieniezny (talk) 12:39, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

ENGVAR
Based on this revision and WP:RETAIN I'd say this article was originally in British English and should be changed back unless thee is a pressing need for it to be in American English. Any objections? --John (talk) 00:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No objection here. Kierzek (talk) 01:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Some of the English needs further editing, there is a "what" at the beginning that should be "which" - suggesting it was written by someone with German as their mother tongue. --Paul Pieniezny (talk) 12:41, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Action movies?
Did he really write his doctoral thesis on 19th century action movies? Were there action movies in the 1800s? 108.6.137.65 (talk) 14:17, 7 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Google tells me his thesis was entitled "Wilhelm von Schütz als Dramatiker. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Romantischen Schule" (Wilhelm von Schütz as Dramatist: A Contribution to the History of the Drama of the Romantic School). IIRC, Schütz was an 18th century romantic novelist, not a 19th century filmmaker specializing in action movies. Anyone have any thoughts? 108.6.137.65 (talk) 14:25, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Career
Why is his career listed as "Bus Driver"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.242.52 (talk) 05:23, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Occupation
Look under personal details in the upper right-hand information. It says "bus driver". 71.199.151.221 (talk) 14:37, 15 December 2013 (UTC)12/13/13

The road back to Good Article status
There's going to be a new biography by Peter Longerich coming out soon; expected publication date is October 15, 2014. In the meantime, I would like to start cleaning up the article by modernising the citations by adding sfn templates. Please let me know if there's any objections to this change. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:41, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Happy to help out in any widescale gnoming too. Not read the article in a while and it needs maintenence I think. Any info about the new Longerich? If it's a major advance, cool :) Irondome (talk) 23:19, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I just found out by chance, by searching for "Goebbels" in Amazon.ca when looking for source material. This is very good news as there's not been a new biography of Goebbels for many years. Here is a summary of the Portuguese edition. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:36, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Joseph Goebbels
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Joseph Goebbels's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Ian Kershaw p.381-382": From Nazi persecution of the Catholic Church in Germany: Ian Kershaw; Hitler a Biography; 2008 Edn; W.W. Norton & Co; London; pp. 381–82 From Reichskonkordat: Ian Kershaw; Hitler: A Biography; 2008 Edn; W.W. Norton & Co; London; pp. 381–82 From Religion in Nazi Germany: Ian Kershaw; Hitler a Biography; 2008 Edn; WW Norton & Company; London; p. 381-382 </ul>

Reference named "William L. Shirer p234-5":<ul> <li>From Kirchenkampf: William L. Shirer; The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich; Secker & Warburg; London; 1960; p234-5</li> <li>From Nazi persecution of the Catholic Church in Germany: William L. Shirer; The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich; Secker & Warburg; London; 1960; pp. 234–35</li> <li>From Reichskonkordat: William L. Shirer; The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich; Secker & Warburg; London; 1960; pp. 234–35</li> </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 13:15, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Shirer is a notoriously inaccurate 'historian' as he was often unconcerned about validating statements - he is a sort of 'gossip columnist' for large slices of his texts.

Goebbels plays were actually performed - though, as far as I can deduce, they were only staged by National Socialist theatre companies. In a period when, even in calculations of the least prejudiced observers, most of the performing arts were dominated by Jewish performers, producers & companies, it would probably have been a miracle if Goebbel's rather unsubtle, tub-thumping polemical plays had been picked up by any remotely commercially mainstream outlet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.224.90.36 (talk) 22:24, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Goebbels: "Propagandist in Berlin"
Reich Minister Joseph Goebbels was the head of the central office of Nazi propaganda Ministry who was comprehensively in charge and responsible for controlling, supervising and regulating the culture and mass media of Nazi Germany. The portrayal of the "perfect Aryan child" in a prime Nazi magazine along with mass media, post cards and posters was a major propaganda campaign under his Ministry, which as it now turns out was also a major blunder of his professional career, therefore the reinstated baby photograph of Hessy Taft is directly related to the section under "Propagandist in Berlin". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamescooly (talk • contribs) 02:43, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

How tall was he?
I've seen photos on random pages that make him look quite short. If there's a source for his height it might be worth adding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.135.127.108 (talk) 20:33, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Lead too detailed
This lead fails lead standards, the purpose of lede is to summarize. This lead contains details which should be placed in body of article. for example his PhD and his academic details should be in a sub section--not in the lead.--Inayity (talk) 06:28, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Trim lead
I have trimmed the lead, which was too long. The removed content is below in case it should be re-inserted elsewhere. I presume that nothing unique was in the lead, that all these facts are repeated someplace in the body. Jehochman Talk 18:49, 3 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Goebbels earned a PhD from Heidelberg University in 1921 with a doctoral thesis on 19th-century literature of the Romantic school. He found work as a journalist and later as a bank clerk and caller on the stock exchange. He also wrote novels and plays, which were rejected by publishers. Goebbels came into contact with the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP), also known as the Nazi Party, in 1923 during the French occupation of the Ruhr and became a member in 1924. In 1926, he was appointed Gauleiter (regional party leader) of Berlin. In this position, he put his propaganda skills to full use, attacking the Social Democratic Party of Germany and Communist Party of Germany and seeking to win over their working-class supporters. Goebbels stressed the need for the Nazis to emphasize both a proletarian and national character. By 1928, he had risen in the party ranks to become one of its most prominent members.


 * Goebbels commissioned a series of antisemitic films including The Eternal Jew and Jud Süß (both 1940). Jud Süß is widely considered to be "one of the most antisemitic films of all time" Goebbels' antisemitic propaganda promoted stereotypes of Jews as materialistic, immoral, cunning, untrustworthy, physically unattractive and rootless wanderers. Goebbels made it a point in such films to warn German girls of the "sexual devastation that Jews had wrought in the past" and to remind them of the Nuremberg Race Laws of 1935, which prohibited any sexual relations between Aryans and Jews. In Nazi ideology, such relations were considered Rassenschande (racial disgrace) and a dishonor of Aryan blood, and were made a punishable offense.

The culture of the German extreme right was violent and anti-intellectual
can anyone give a decent quote on that ? Of course, one that also makes it clear that the "extreme right" as you call it is more violent than other political groups to be particularly deserving of this epithet.MMuneyoshi (talk) 17:49, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Fest
I am bringing in on inter-library loan a copy of The face of the Third Reich : portraits of the Nazi leadership by Joachim C. Fest, so that the citations can be properly verified. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:57, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I have read the book before. It is a collection of short biographies Nazi main figures. The book is not the best and certainly dated now. I wish I could help edit tonight but my internet server is down for my house and I'm writing this from my iPhone. Kierzek (talk) 01:37, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the content from that source should be removed, if not also present in other sources. It's heavily used to source this article, considering that it appears to be about a 10-page chapter in the book. (It's even quoted from, as though he's an authority on the subject.) I will assess once the book arrives. I will have Longerich soon, our copy arrived yesterday and still needs to be catalogued and processed. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:18, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * For one, Longerich disagrees with Fest as to Goebbels reaction and concern (or lack thereof) as to being found unable to serve in the military during the First World War. There are better RS sources we can use then Fest's "10-page chapter" in his book for this article. Kierzek (talk) 14:35, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * What sketched me out was the statement "He later sometimes misrepresented himself as a war veteran..." Stuff like that needs impeccable sourcing, and I don't think Fest is adequate. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:57, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree. Kierzek (talk) 15:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Interesting photo
Here's an interesting photo, parking here for possible future use: File:Bundesarchiv Bild 102-10547, Berlin, Goebbels und Göring.jpg. I don't know where we would fit it in though. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting early photo, in civilian attire. Kierzek (talk) 14:51, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Magda ?
His wife is called Magda Ritschel in the template and then Magda Quandt in the text. I don't know if the template is the place but perhaps. The article about her is titled Magda Goebbels Should she be listed somewhere as Magda Goebbels (Quandt nee Ritschel)? Or even Magda Goebbels (Quandt Friedländer nee Ritschel)? --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 02:34, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I tweaked it and await others editors thoughts on same. Kierzek (talk) 12:44, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Else Janke
The bit about him ending his relationship with Else after she disclosed she was half Jewish, is misleading. He continued his relationship for 4 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.31.91.189 (talk) 18:55, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Corrected, thanks. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:38, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Date of photograph
The 1933 date of the photograph of Goebbels with Hitler and one of his daughters is not consistent with the 1932 date of birth of his eldest daughter given in article Goebbels_children (i.e. the child in the photograph is too old). Clivemacd (talk) 17:32, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The Bundesarchiv description states the child is Helga, born 1932. The date has to be incorrect. Good catch. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:19, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar for You! EVERYONE, HUZZA!
This is a really big deal, as it's a level 4 vital article and gets nearly a million views a year. Thanks to all who worked on this important project. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:29, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, good work guys; I'm glad this important article is GA for our readers. Thanks again, Kierzek (talk) 18:34, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Gerbelz
Actually already discussed once, but the funny /r/ is still there. I can refer to Dictionary.com which gives IPA as /ˈgœ bəls/. --Max Shakhray (talk) 22:56, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I have removed it. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:56, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Goebbels "contributions" in World War I
He would later falsely claim that his leg deformity was a result of a war wound; the nearest personel contribution Goebbels would make toward World War I was as from June 1917 to October 1917 as a Bürosoldat (office soldier) beim Vaterländischen Hilfswerk {Self help unit} in Rheydt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.5.87.37 (talk) 15:47, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Goebbels wrote that he was a communist in the mid 1920s
Goebbels wrote in his diary in 1924 ""Communism. Jewry. I am a German communist." The source is Peter Longerich's Goebbels, p. 26

Shouldn't this be included in the article?--John Bird (talk) 22:35, 27 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I would be very interested in see the whole entry for that day, or at least the most pertinent part, to get some context here. My immediate reaction is that G is actually musing about a contrast, not an identification with Communism. "I am a German Communist" seems (to me) to be indicating that he is saying "I am a national socialist". Irondome (talk) 23:04, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Most of Longerich's biography of Goebbels is freely available to read via Google books (just type in "German communist"). Goebbels in the early to mid 1920s identified much more with socialism than any form of nationalism. He admired Lenin, read a lot of Russian novelists such as Dostoevsky, saw Russia as Germany's natural ally and openly called himself a German communist, see pages 26 and 534.

Goebbels wasn't talking about any contrast, in the 1920s he was much more influenced by socialist thinkers and read Marx and other left-wing thinkers and identified himself as such, it was this that actually drew him to Nazism. Remember the name of the party was 'National Socialist' and Goebbels personally identified much more with the latter part than the former.--John Bird (talk) 01:14, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah I know his affiliations with the Strasser brothers. So he was a left wing nazi basically. Irondome (talk) 12:12, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, he was, at the time, part of the left leaning "socialist" part of the Party. But, that did not last and he changed to Hitler's Munich based wing of the Party in 1926, after convincing himself that Hitler was "the greatest thing since sliced bread", so to speak; Hitler won out in the end. Kierzek (talk) 12:18, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Page 39-40 of Longerich: Longerich implies that Goebbels thought Communism is flawed because several of its top leaders in the USSR were Jews. Page 43, Goebbels studies the works of Karl Marx and Rosa Luxemburg, but finds his own antisemitism gets in the way of accepting. Page 48–49, Longerich says that Goebbels' notion of socialism was not about state control of the means of production, but rather about controlling and organizing the society and its citizens. Therefore it was not true socialism, but something else. Page 49, he goes on to say that Goebbels wished to be viewed as a radical left-leaning member of the NSDAP, and hence being a socialist was "a fanciful pose he liked to strike." — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:18, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

User:Diannaa

That's correct but his earlier adherence to left-wing politics should be included in the article, including his own words of describing himself as a 'German communist', it was the 'socialist' part of the Nazi party that made an impact on the young Goebbels, not the nationalist side of it. It was only after he joined the Nazi party that he started to adhere to nationalist beliefs.--John Bird (talk) 10:06, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Those aspects are discussed in the article; so, I am at a loss what you feel needs to be added. And he continued to be "left leaning" (and conflicted) until during 1926 when Hitler "won him back over" and the "Northern sector" lost out. Kierzek (talk) 15:19, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Inclusion of quotes from Goebbels' diaries about the extermination of the Jews
Here are two quotes from Goebbels' diaries:

February 14, 1942:

"The Führer once again expressed his determination to clean up the Jews in Europe pitilessly. There must be no squeamish sentimentalism about it. The Jews have deserved the catastrophe that has now overtaken them. Their destruction will go hand in hand with the destruction of our enemies. We must hasten this process with cold ruthlessness."

March 27, 1942:

"A judgment is being visited upon the Jews that, while barbaric, is fully deserved by them. The prophecy which the Führer made about them for having brought on a new world war is beginning to come true in a most terrible manner. One must not be sentimental in these matters. If we did not fight the Jews, they would destroy us. It's a life-and-death struggle between the Aryan race and the Jewish bacillus."

Does anyone feel that these need to be included in the article?--John Bird (talk) 19:08, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't; in fact I just removed them. It's self-serving stuff he told himself to justify what they were doing, and I don't think we should include it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't believe they should be included either. They are verbiage which is not needed and self-serving. Kierzek (talk) 00:52, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Quote removal
Just wanted to add a longer explanation of why I removed the quote in. It doesn't tell us anything that isn't already covered, and without a detailed off-topic explanation of who Kerrl is and why his opinion is important, it lacks context. For these reasons I think we should not include it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:12, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree, it really does not add information which is not already covered. Kierzek (talk) 14:24, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Missing an obvious point
This is a very good article but it's missing what I would have thought was a fairly obvious point: why is his last name spelled as "Goebbels" instead of as "Göbbels". I realized it is universally spelled without the umlaut, but shouldn't there be some explanation why? How is his name spelled on his birth certificate? Shouldn't there be an explanation of this (presumably in a footnote) when his name is presented in the first sentence? __209.179.86.123 (talk) 17:38, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The sources we used to prepare the article don't cover this point. The German wiki also uses "Goebbels" without any comment on the spelling. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * It is quite common for German names to be spelled in full without umlaut. Goethe and Emmy Noether spring to mind. There is no "why", any more than for any other point of custom. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:02, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Removal of quotations
I have twice removed some quotations from the article. My reason is because we don't build our articles using primary sources such as the subject's diaries. These particular quotations are not very enlightening and don't add anything useful to the article, in my opinion. Discussion welcome. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * They do not add anything substantive to the article and are trivial in nature. They should stay out. Kierzek (talk) 14:18, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Star of David
I have added this image because it is a visual reminder of the introduction of the Star of David by Goebbels to mark Jews, yet another humiliation for the Jews. 86.188.77.110 (talk) 14:35, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That is already mentioned in the article; along with harsher measures/"treatment" he advocated, including the Holocaust. Kierzek (talk) 16:30, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It is mentioned but not illustrated> You have missed the point entirely. 86.188.77.110 (talk) 17:37, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I am again removing photo of Konrad Henlein as being off-topic for this article. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:06, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with the removal; off-topic and trivial.Kierzek (talk) 22:15, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The Star of David is ok to include in my opinion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:33, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Religion in the infobox
This comment is regarding the following revert:

There have been several RfCs on religion in the infobox:

15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

This RfC had a clear consensus for removing the religion parameter from the infobox for individuals (living, deceased, and fictional), groups, schools, institutions, and political parties that have no religion, but that RfC was determined by the closing administrator to not apply to nations.

17 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations.

This RfC had a clear consensus for removing the religion parameter for countries, nations, states, regions, etc., all of which were determined to not have religions.

31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.

This RfC was a response to certain individuals insisting that the previous RfCs did not apply to their favorite pages (schools, political parties, sports teams, computer operating systems, organized crime gangs...) and had a clear consensus that in all all infoboxes in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the "Religion=" parameter of the infobox.

11 April 2016 RfC: RfC: Religion in biographical infoboxes.

In this RfC, there was a clear consensus to remove the "religion=" and "denomination=" parameters from all infoboxes, not just the ones that call atheism/agnosticism a religion.

There have been four RfCs on this, and all four showed the same overwhelming consensus. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:47, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Journalist
Please stop removing a core biographical data point; "insulting" alone is not a valid criterion. He called himself a journalist. His contemporary fellow journalists called him a journalist. Present-day historians call him a journalist. If you think "journalist" is insufficiently specific, I'm open to alternatives, but given the varied nature of his actual job responsibilities while working in journalism (newswriter, "Redakteur", ...) I think it's the best we can do. Damvile (talk) 20:24, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything on Goebbels on page 130, and on page 124 it says he failed to get a job in journalism. So the Shirer citation still fails verification in my opinion. I've got Shirer 1960 18th printing and 21st printing and the pagination is the same in both copies. Perhaps a quotation would help? — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:49, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * "Finally, Goebbels’ talents as a rowdy journalist – he now had a Berlin newspaper of his own, Der Angriff, to spout off in – and as a rabble – rousing orator were invaluable to the party." It's in Book II, near the end of Chapter 6. Simon and Shuster 1990 edition, the one with the new afterword; 17th printing. The paragraph where the Tageblatt tells him to take a hike is on page 120 in my copy. Damvile (talk) 23:34, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, bizarre: if I do a search for the 1990 Simon and Shuster version on Google Books, it says my quote is on page 148. Completely different typesetting too. IDK either. Damvile (talk) 23:41, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Goebbels ownership and editing of Der Angriff is not an example of "journalism", it's an example of his propaganda work. The only thing that would be acceptable to list him as a journalist is that he worked as such before that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:48, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It's an example of an eminent historian calling him a journalist though. (Not saying it's the best example imaginable; I mostly threw it in because the article was already citing Shirer, so Shirer evidently counts as a credible source for this article.) In any case, there's still the Simone Richter book, which documents years of non-propaganda journalism work in a variety of positions. Before he became a political operator, he was a professional, full-time journalist. To the best of my knowledge, this has never before been disputed. A cursory search finds plenty of examples of historians referring to Goebbels as "a journalist". None of them seem to feel any need to explain themselves, which is probably precisely because it's never been a controversial thing to say. Can you find any useful sources that say Goebbels was not a journalist? Damvile (talk) 00:12, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Reuth, in his biography 1993 biolgraphy, does not refer to Goebbels being a full-time professional journals. On pages 40-41, he mentions 6 articles that were accepted for the Westdeutsche Landeszeitung, and then on page 50, he goes into Goebbels' applications for positions on the Vossiche Zeitung and the Berliner Taglebatt, jobs he did not get. Reuth does not refer to any other work that Goebbels did as a "professional, full-time journalist".Please provide the specifics of what Richter claims - what newspapers or magazine during what time span. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:15, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, please provide the bona fides of Simone Richter, I can find nothing about her, as opposed to Ralf Georg Reuth. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:23, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * According to this translation of this catalog entry of Richter's book, "The course of [his] development from the social radical revolutionary to the faithful follower of the "Führer" and the fanatical Jew-hater is reflected in his journalistic textual reports - in the "Volkische Freiheit", the "National Socialist Letters", in the "attack" and "Volkischer Beobachter".The National Socialist Letters, Der Angriff ("The Attack", Goebbel's personal newspaper)), and Volkischer Beobachter are all Nazi-publications, either owned by the party or by members of the party, while the name of Volkische Freiheit -- with which I am not familiar -- indicates that it is part of the Volkische movement. That would make his writings in these publication propaganda on behalf of the Nazis and not journalism.  If Richter presents a true career in journalism, in publications not connected to the National Socialist movement, I'd like to know what that is. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:02, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * So I kind of, sort of replied to this 3.5 months later on a different talk page. It's the penultimate comment, for those who weren't there.
 * Regarding Richter's bona fides, she is safely mainstream. Her publisher is eminent and beyond reproach. Reuth is problematic, he e.g. doesn't even get the number of articles right. In fairness, he was probably working from bad sources. Richter ordered an entire new transcription of Goebbles' diaries because the existing ones were so poor. As an aside, Völkische propaganda and Nazi propaganda are different things.
 * Involvement with the Völkische movement doesn't, by itself, prove anything one way or the other. The movement was enormously diverse, adherents ranged from bigoted-but-harmless philistines (think the dad in Unterm Rad) to esotericist nutjobs (think Lanz von Liebenfels) to quasi-aestheticists (think Oscar Wilde except he has no dental fricatives and hates the French) to bog-standard reactionaries. The persistent overlap with the proto-hippies of the Wandervogel alone fills a few fat books. Many of them didn't get along with Nazis and Hitler himself later tried to have a few of their prophets written out of history.
 * Maybe someone should write an article on pre-Hitler nationalist German newspapers to illustrate what the problem is here. It would need to be fantastically well sourced though because it would attract some interference from denialists and apologists. The Clean Wehrmacht myth has been thoroughly relegated to the fringe, the Clean Journalism myth not so much. Damvile (talk) 11:45, 21 September 2018 (UTC)