Talk:Nazi Germany

Nazi Germany
so, yes fascism does exist, but this is the nazi state not the "fascist state", it seems to imply a own form of government its possible that i am mistaken and am open to a diffrent perspective anyhow such a bold claim needs citations its possible that nazi germany could informally called a fascist state but no "fascist state" stand alone concept Gooduserdude (talk) 17:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Nazism is a form of fascism. Slatersteven (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * yes Nazism is indeed a form of fascism, still it does not justify the specific edit, fascism is a form of nationalism (albeit a far-right and racial ultranationalist one) does it that mean we should call nazi germany a fascist nationalist state? as i will repeat since you seem to miss my above point, such a bold claim needs citations its possible that nazi germany could informally called a fascist state but no "fascist state" stand alone concept Gooduserdude (talk) 18:12, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * (you seem to have edit this page quite frequently and an admin), meybe you can come to this discussion? meybe if such a stand alone concept exists, it could be a new article Fascist state (currently a redirect) otherwise why should an informal term be used in the infobox as a government type? Gooduserdude (talk) 18:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Why do you say "fascism" is an informal term? I don't think that's so.I see that in the body of the article we describe Nazi Germany as fascist, sourced to Spielvogel (2016). Our article Nazism notes that "Nazism is a form of fascism, with disdain for liberal democracy and the parliamentary system" and offers four citations, one of which is the same work by Spielvogel. The Spielvogel citation contains a quote: "Nazism was only one, although the most important, of a number of similar-looking fascist movements in Europe between World War I and World War II." So the decscription as it being a fascist state is okay to keep in my opinion. — Diannaa (talk) 18:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * my concern was not fascism being a informal term, fascism is an ideology (or group of ideologies), but "fascist state" implies a specific form of government, i meant "fascist state" is informal, since its while its indeed used by historians (not so often at all https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Fascist+state&oq=fa) i cannot find material for a Fascist state article, hence the term is informal not a seperate form of goverment Gooduserdude (talk) 19:01, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If you really want, we could link only 'fascist' but I think you're making a bigger deal out of this than it is. Something can be 'fascist'. That's a trivial statement. JackTheSecond (talk) 19:13, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ok JackTheSecond is right, it does not have to be a bigger deal than it is. Something can indeed be called fascist, this concludes this discussion. Gooduserdude (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2024
recently changed the image in the infobox to one which is apparently more accurate, but he forgot to include the "frameless" parameter that was previously there. As a result the infobox is far too big.

Whatever image is used, someone should add the frameless parameter back. InherentDogma (talk) 19:20, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Done prior to request. JackTheSecond (talk) 20:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Wait
Isn't it also known as the Third Reich? 2600:1700:3680:8B70:35D5:B2D7:C65:3053 (talk) 04:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Yes, mentioned in the second sentence. — Czello (music) 07:12, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Succeeded by
Currently, the "Succeeded by" section of the infobox contains East Germany, West Germany, and Allied-occupied Austria. It also references a talk page consensus on these choices, which I have been unable to locate (I'm sure it's around, I just haven't found it). Why are East and West Germany chosen instead of Soviet occupation zone in Germany, American occupation zone in Germany, British occupation zone in Germany, and French occupation zone in Germany? If following the page's logic, then why isn't Austria included instead of Allied-occupied Austria?

If this decision was based the current options being more notable, I feel that this is a poor decision for providing factually correct information, as the occupation zones WERE the direct successors, and the page should reflect as such. East and West Germany were not created until four years after Nazi Germany ceased to exist. At the very least, if these two must be included, why not still include the occupation zone articles as well, and put the years of each entity's creation in parenthesis next to it, similar to what KGB has for preceding and succeeding agencies? Just things to consider.

Thanks, SavagePanda845 (talk) 05:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The main previous discussions are located at Talk:Nazi Germany/Archive 11 and Talk:Nazi Germany/Archive 13. Searching the archives using the search term "successor" reveals there may be discussions or comments in other archives. — Diannaa (talk) 14:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Sicily pertains to Italy...
Please correct: "The Allies landed in Sicily in July 1943 and in Italy in September." to  "The Allies landed in Sicily in July 1943 and in CONTINENTAL Italy in September." 62.211.181.80 (talk) 16:07, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Fixed. --Obenritter (talk) 16:21, 14 June 2024 (UTC)