Template:Did you know nominations/Waffen-SS veterans in post-war Germany


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Flibirigit (talk) 02:09, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Waffen-SS veterans in post-war Germany

 * ... that Waffen-SS veterans created an apologist literature portaying the Waffen-SS as an elite organization clean of war crimes?
 * ALT1:... that, like many Waffen-SS veterans, German actor Horst Tappert concealed his military service?
 * ALT2:... that Waffen-SS veterans exaggerated their contribution to Nazi military victories?
 * ALT3:... that Chancellor Konrad Adenauer falsely claimed that Waffen-SS veterans had not murdered any Jews during the Holocaust?
 * Reviewed: Sumpul River massacre

Moved to mainspace by Turismond (talk). Nominated by Catrìona (talk) at 05:20, 23 September 2018 (UTC).


 * Symbol possible vote.svg Not interesting enough: every one know about holocaust deniers and saying "did you know that some SS men deny having committed war crimes?" is not hooky enough for DYK. L293D (☎ • ✎) 18:29, 12 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the comment, but what do you think of ALT3? Before the Trump era, it was not usual for the leader of the country to make such as obviously, blatantly, verifiably false, "pants on fire" type statement. Catrìona (talk) 19:11, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd go with option 0: "...created an apologist literature portaying the Waffen-SS as an elite organization clean of war crimes?", but perhaps modify it to
 * "...created a body of apologist literature portaying the Waffen-SS as an elite organization and a precursor to NATO?"
 * Their propaganda efforts are not that well known, and would perhaps explain why Waffen-SS re-enactment is considered a wholesome father-son activity by some in the United States. See for example:
 * K.e.coffman (talk) 00:17, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * If none of the above hooks are quite catchy enough what about the subject of the secret Waffen-SS and Wehrmacht veteran army that was formed in West Germany in 1949? I haven't looked to far into it until now but I noticed it actually has an article on Wikipedia. Turismond (talk) 01:34, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * If none of the above hooks are quite catchy enough what about the subject of the secret Waffen-SS and Wehrmacht veteran army that was formed in West Germany in 1949? I haven't looked to far into it until now but I noticed it actually has an article on Wikipedia. Turismond (talk) 01:34, 13 October 2018 (UTC)


 * ALT4:... that Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS veterans, in 1949, formed a 40,000-strong secret army in West Germany?
 * Symbol voting keep.svg looks good, AGF on the German reference. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:42, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Could we add Schnez-Truppe to the DYK? It's been expanded 5x and I can provide Template:Did you know nominations/Memoriale della Shoah as an additional qpq. Thanks! Catrìona (talk) 00:08, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * There is already mention of Schnez-Truppe (piped as "secret army") in ALT4, which is the one I approved. Am I missing something? I might suggest you make a second DKY about it, though. L293D (☎</b> • <b style="color:#000">✎</b>) 00:12, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, never mind, Schnez-Truppe does not fit the recentness requirements. <b style="color:#060">L293D</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b> • <b style="color:#000">✎</b>) 00:14, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

According to the DYK rules, multiple articles can be nominated to appear in the same hook. My Dyk check tool finds that the article was expanded 5x since 16 October, therefore eligible. Catrìona (talk) 00:21, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Silly me, I only looked for your edits on Schnez-Truppe and didn't notice that it was actually another editor who expanded it. Yes, you could create an ALT5 with both articles. <b style="color:#060">L293D</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b> • <b style="color:#000">✎</b>) 00:29, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

I considered this nomination for promotion, but I am unsure if an ALT5 is coming, or if ALT4 is still approved?
 * I think ALT4 might be the one as both articles in the hook are now bolded. Turismond (talk) 08:34, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, could you confirm if you approved the revised ALT4? Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 12:59, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I was waiting for an ALT5 too but apparently ALT4 got changed instead. Yes, I approved the revised ALT4. <b style="color:#060">L293D</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b> • <b style="color:#000">✎</b>) 13:22, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Will promote soon. Flibirigit (talk) 13:33, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg putting tick at bottom of conversation as per User:L293D's comment's above. Flibirigit (talk) 16:48, 22 November 2018 (UTC)