Talk:Nuremberg trials

Light pro-defendant bias?
I dont think this is near obvious or major enough to warrant a tag in the article, and Im certainly not an experienced enough editor to make a full claim of bias here, but while reading the section on the prosecutions and defences I couldnt help but feel like their structure and wording lightly (that is to say, quite subtly) favors the defence and guides the reader towards believing the defence was treated unfairly. I was hoping a more experienced editor could take a look and give their thoughts. Googleguy007 (talk) 12:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)


 * specifically what in the article is leading you to this conclusion? (t &#183; c)  buidhe  13:08, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Date of the British prosecution's opening speech
The article states that Hartley Shawcross gave an opening speech on the 12th of December: "The British prosecution covered the charge of crimes against peace, [...] On 12 December, Shawcross gave the opening speech..." in the 'American and British Prosecution' section of 'Course of the trial'. However, the Avalon Project's transcript of the trials (linked in the article itself) lists Shawcross's speech as having taken place on the 4th of December instead (https://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/imtproc_v3menu.asp). At least one other source found online supports this date (the webpage of Rober H. Jackson Center - https://www.roberthjackson.org/nuremberg-event/british-opening-statement-2/). As the other dates in the article appear to line up with Avalon Project, this may be a mistake caused by the fact that 4th of December was the twelfth day of the trials. Jko.366 (talk) 01:24, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I propose merging Subsequent Nuremburg Trials into Nuremburg trials. I think that since most of the content of the quite short Subsequent Nuremberg Trials article already exists under the heading: "Subsequent Nuremberg Trials" in the article of Nuremberg Trials, a merge would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Nuremberg Trials, and would in fact enhance the main article, which is notably more popular between the two. ShoBDin (talk) 15:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose adding more content about the subsequent trials to this article would be UNDUE. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  17:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)