Jump to content

Talk:Sturmmann: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
MilHistBot (talk | contribs)
Automatic MILHIST checklist assessment
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
m Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "C" in {{WPBS}}.
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|
{{WPMILHIST|class=C|b1=no|b2=yes|b3=yes|b4=yes|b5=yes|Culture=y|German=yes|WWII=yes}}
{{WikiProject Military history|class=C|b1=no|b2=yes|b3=yes|b4=yes|b5=yes|Culture=y|German=yes|WWII=yes}}

}}
== "Sturmmann" in neo-nazi context ==
== "Sturmmann" in neo-nazi context ==
I wondered if somebody could cite a source for "Sturmmann" typically referring to "a member of a Neo-Nazi group" these days. I, as a German, have never heard it in that context and find it quite absurd. -[[User:84.58.45.1|84.58.45.1]] 18:31, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
I wondered if somebody could cite a source for "Sturmmann" typically referring to "a member of a Neo-Nazi group" these days. I, as a German, have never heard it in that context and find it quite absurd. -[[User:84.58.45.1|84.58.45.1]] 18:31, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:46, 9 February 2024

"Sturmmann" in neo-nazi context

[edit]

I wondered if somebody could cite a source for "Sturmmann" typically referring to "a member of a Neo-Nazi group" these days. I, as a German, have never heard it in that context and find it quite absurd. -84.58.45.1 18:31, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If the literal translation is stormtrooper, would not a paramilitary Neo-Nazi group call thier members Sturmmanner or something like that? I difer to the German speaker, but that would make sense to me. -Husnock 19:08, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, maybe it would make sense to use SS/SA ranks if there were such a group. But can you name one? I'm pretty sure if this usage was common, I would've heard about it. -84.58.45.156 00:26, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am German citizen too and haven't heard of it either. 88.73.91.109 20:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Tim[reply]
I second the objections of my compatriots and want to add that the mentioning of the modern german armed forces doesn't make sense either. At least not in a official manner. --212.144.95.105 (talk) 19:14, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is not used in current german military context. A soldier using this would get disciplinary punishment. --82.113.121.29 (talk) 22:39, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "Obersturmmann" rank in the SA

[edit]

I think someone's been re-writing history. I've never seen in any book or publication a reference to the SA having a rank called "Obersturmmann". It also appears this has spread across all the rank boxes, so we need to investigate if this is true or remove it if it isn't. -OberRanks (talk) 17:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in a recent e-mail OberRanks, the lower classes herein need ce work. I don't recall the rank of: SA-Obersturmmann anywhere from my books; there was a NSDAP rank of Obersturmmann, as you know. I will say that German Wikipedia does mention it, written: "SA-Obersturmmann" or "Lieutenant SA man". But even there it is NOT in the printed chart of SA ranks they show and use, nor cited therein. I re-checked my English RS source books and it is NOT there for the SA but only as a NSDAP rank. I therefore am removing it herein. I note there are other errors in the end table as to ranks with links which I have fixed. Kierzek (talk) 18:43, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The rank table for Mann (military rank) needs to be fixed for the same reasons; I just don't have time tonight. Kierzek (talk) 23:19, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think is a fabrication. I cant find it anywhere else in any publication. -OberRanks (talk) 03:36, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have now also fixed the rank table for Mann (military rank) and added cites for same. Kierzek (talk) 23:50, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]