Talk:Stuttgart 21

Hegelgebäude
See also discussion on the station itself. . wikipedia would call this "local knowledge" so perhaps it just ain't available on the Internet!

Old Discussion
Since this is a discussion page and I enjoy the privilege of being a Wikipedian, I (demodave) feel compelled to share a thought/opinion. It seems obvious to me that - if Stuttgart 21 is indeed seen as rebranding Stuttgart as "The new Heart of Europe" and connecting Paris all the way through to Budapest (what, no mention of Munich on the way?) - there need to be European funds involved in building the project, not just Deutsche Bahn, Baden-Württemburg, and the German Federal government. I dunno, but that's me and my two eurocents. I hope I don't get in trouble for being a rabble-rouser! :) Demodave (talk) 16:03, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Dave Stuttgart21 is a project to rebuild the railway station only, it is not part of any rebranding, the InterEuro trains will still pass though ,with the new or the old station, and is not financed in any way from the EU, The extension of the line Wendlingen _Ulm is however a part of the Paris -Budapest line, and is a seperate project that is partly finance by the EU.

The Financing of Stuttgart 21 is in it's entirety from the taxpayer, From the Federal Government, the State of Baden-Wuertenburg, the City of Stuttgart, and the Bahn Ag, which is 100% owned by the federal Government , and therefore the taxpayer. Baden-Wuertenburg and the City of Stuttgart, have no legal obligation to contribute to the financing and only did so the prevent the project from being abandoned, hence the protests.93.212.228.75 (talk) 15:29, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

By this logic everything is only paid by the tax payer. A big part of the project is financed by building new buildings on the old tracks. The Bahn AG is a company (that is owned by the state). However there is one incorrectness in the article. The Critics do not have a single concept what they want. Some want a new state some want a new station some do not want to cut down trees. Most of there aims do contradict each other, once they are observed closely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.158.188.232 (talk) 10:18, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The logic is nothing but just your opinion. I mean, who said that in order claim "we are the heart of Europe" the project has to be financially covered by the european union? Slovakia claims it is the heart of Europe, Basel also does.--91.14.137.197 (talk) 21:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

IP 93.212.228.75 is wrong:
 * Stuttgart 21 is a part of the Stuttgart–Augsburg new and upgraded railway. The European Union partly finances the Wendlingen-Ulm high-speed line and the new line leading from Wendlingen to Stuttgart Central Station (tracks with tunnels), later is part of Stuttgart 21. The European Union isn't financing the new main station (building and the other tracks, tunnels...).
 * While the Bahn AG is owned by the federal Government, it doesn't mean that the Bahn AG gets its money (and the part the company has to pay for Stuttgart 21) from the the federal Government (and therefore from the taxpayer) but (mainly) from the customers who pay for the haulage capacity.
 * Baden-Wuertenburg and the City of Stuttgart are party to a contract (in 2007), and by that have to pay. There isn't an opt-out in the contract. (Some opponent of the project try to construct something like that by claiming that an implicit basis of the contract isn't existing anymore, which is unproved yet.) -- Kleiner Tümmler (talk) 18:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Neutrality
The article lacks on neutrality. So far the opposition towards Stuttgart 21 is mainly addressed without noticing that there is also in public support for it. I changed some points to make a start to gain more neutrality because it is crucial for a good wikipedia article. Winniepoooh (talk) 11:32, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

This wikipedia entrys regarding the Stuttgart 21 project is clearly biased in favor of the opposition and thus fails to present a balanced picture of the project and debate. This entry should be critically flagged as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.206.14.34 (talk) 11:10, 27 October 2010 (UTC)


 * May I add, the actual grounds for opposition are not presented clearly. As a first-time reader, it took me a long time to understand what the opposition is about (old building + park space) - the article could benefit from a summary in the lead paragraph(s). elpincha (talk) 14:17, 28 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I removed the word "peaceful" in the paragraph dealing with the demonstrators during the escalation of police force at the demonstrations in 2010. There is no reference to that in the citation, and it is proven that demonstrators were not acting peacefully against the police, for example by throwing objects. This is clearly cited in the German article. Kusch3ln (talk) 17:07, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Corrections
Schlossgarten (Castle Park). The park (see Old Castle (Stuttgart) and New Castle (Stuttgart))

Bad translation, Schlossgarten= Palace Gardens, The Schloss was the Residence of the previous King of Wuertemburg, and is therfor a Palace

Old Castle = Old Palace New Castle = New Palace

Castle is normaly translated as Burg, meaning a Fort, or fortified residence.

Schloss or Schloß is always a residence93.212.228.75 (talk) 15:40, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Shock image

 * Image:Blinded by water cannon.jpg

I believe that a drastic image like this shouldn't be visible in the article page without warning of some kind. At the same time, it shouldn't be removed from public view completely, since the event it documents deserves attention. Perhaps a "censored" version should be posted, with an optional link to full version. – 6birc (talk) 16:31, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

so some self righteous eco-douche got a nose bleed from the big bad policeman's garden hose. big deal. this image is an obvious attempt to tug heartstrings in the "opposition's" favor —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.105.101.175 (talk) 22:36, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

That's right, the image is in the "opposition's" favour. But it ain't drastic, and if the police is as benevolent as you imply, then it won't disturb anybody. And if that image favours the opposition, then the fault was sending the police force against peaceful demonstrators - which is always the wrong cause of action - and not publishing the picture. If a picture exists and is genuine, then there's no reason not to publish it. Anything else is censorship in favour of the non-opposition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.84.21.77 (talk) 08:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.railway-technology.com/news/newsdeutsche-bahn-backs-stuttgart-21-project-despite-cost-increase
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 12:39, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

✅ This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 21:19, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Stuttgart 21. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080502033312/http://www.stuttgart21.de/site/stuttgart21/de/verbindungen21/baugenehmigungsverfahren/baugenehmigungsverfahren.html to http://www.stuttgart21.de/site/stuttgart21/de/verbindungen21/baugenehmigungsverfahren/baugenehmigungsverfahren.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091126024601/http://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/stz/page/2287550_0_4248_-drexler-nennt-termin-februar-2010-baubeginn-fuer-stuttgart-21.html to http://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/stz/page/2287550_0_4248_-drexler-nennt-termin-februar-2010-baubeginn-fuer-stuttgart-21.html
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20070712080204/http://www.stuttgarter-nachrichten.de/stn/page/detail.php/1457698?_suchtag=2007-06-29 to http://www.stuttgarter-nachrichten.de/stn/page/detail.php/1457698?_suchtag=2007-06-29
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071221064027/http://www.bmvbs.de/-,302.1003300/Tiefensee-Durchbruch-fuer-die-.htm to http://www.bmvbs.de/-,302.1003300/Tiefensee-Durchbruch-fuer-die-.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091127073958/http://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/stz/page/2290433_0_7998_-denkmalschuetzer-appell-bonatzbau-soll-weltkulturerbe-werden.html to http://stuttgarter-zeitung.de/stz/page/2290433_0_7998_-denkmalschuetzer-appell-bonatzbau-soll-weltkulturerbe-werden.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111206171901/http://www.statistik-bw.de/Wahlen/Volksabstimmung_2011/Land.asp to http://www.statistik-bw.de/Wahlen/Volksabstimmung_2011/Land.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130922195310/http://www.bahnprojekt-stuttgart-ulm.de/en/permanent/english/ to http://www.bahnprojekt-stuttgart-ulm.de/en/permanent/english/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:37, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Article needs revising and updating
This article is in need of an extensive rewrite. The disputes over Stuttgart 21, dating from 2010 and 2011, as well as any electoral implications, are far too extensive and the level of detail is less relevant given that the opposition was overcome and the project is nearing completion. The project itself is poorly described and there have been no updates about the progress of construction in years. New photographs should be provided along with far more explanation of the project. Jaedglass (talk) 08:55 23 December 2023 (UTC)