Talk:Karl Ludwig Giesecke

Query for Hhbruun
Hello Hhbrunn,

I can't understand the edit you just made. What was Giesecke's ancestry? And what was in the sister's letter? Clarification would be appreciated.

Thanks, Opus33 (talk) 23:26, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

-> Whittaker writes: "In fact it was the chance discovery (my emphasis) of a letter from GIESECKE's sister to the Danish authorities written in 1810 and enquiring about the welfare of her brother whom she knew to be in Greenland, that GIESECKE's relationship with the Augsburg METZLERs was firmly established. Before the publication of the 1910 account there had been much confusion about his precise origins and identification for several reasons; ..." My edit was an attempt to tell a bit the story about how he put a veil over his ancestry and how a chance finding of the hundred years old letter in an archive unveiled it. Perhaps you can do it better. Please, give it a go. Hhbruun (talk) 11:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Hhbruun, the change you made does clarify.


 * Still, I continue to wonder why Giesecke wanted to keep his family name obscure. Is it possible that the Metzlers were Jewish and Giesecke was trying to escape from prejudice?  Or perhaps social class was involved, i.e. he did not want it known that he was a tailor's son... Or whatever.  Opus33 (talk) 21:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Complaint from Anon
This article is fraught with errors and misinformation taken from the secondary literature. Giesecke already traded minerals long before he left Vienna (to give only one among many mistakes). And the German quote from Cornet's book is flawed.--194.166.47.106 (talk) 08:15, 20 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Anon. In order to facilitate improvements, please specify reference sources that would be helpful.


 * Re. your remark concerning secondary sources, you may not be aware that WP actually discourages (indeed, almost forbids) use of primary sources. I personally don't agree with the policy, but there it is. For reference, consult WP:PRIMARY.


 * Yours truly, Opus33 (talk) 08:44, 20 June 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, according to your weird logic the use of Cornet's original 1849 book (instead of the flawed quotes from Batley and Dent) is against WP's guidelines. Furthermore I have to add that Gieseke always signed his name "Gieseke", without a c!--194.166.47.106 (talk) 09:03, 20 June 2012 (UTC)


 * What do you expect from ignoramuses who don't understand a word of German and produce grammatically ludicrous statements such as "joining 'Zur gekrönte Hoffnung'"? It's hopeless.--178.191.229.96 (talk) 21:17, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * If you're the same anon I've seen before: your own English is not up to par, and you should leave judgments about how to incorporate German expressions into English prose to native speakers. Opus33 (talk) 04:35, 5 May 2013 (UTC)


 * If I may add my 2c here: a lodge named "Zur gekrönte Hoffnung" never existed. Your argument "to leave the incorpration of German expressions to native speakers" is completely beside the point, because they are the last ones to notice that the German expressions are wrong.--91.113.57.116 (talk) 19:04, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Whittaker as "source"
Since Whittaker's 2001 article is mainly based on hearsay, footnote 11 is completely worthless. The "record of proceedings against GIESECKE for non-payment of rent in the municipal archives of Vienna", about which "Ibbler[sic!] told Waterhouse", has to be exactly sourced, or else it's just worthless. Whittaker is more or less irrelevant anyway. He isn't even aware of the fact that Giesecke was married and had children during his stay in Vienna.--88.117.74.186 (talk) 09:50, 30 March 2017 (UTC)