Talk:Austrians

Eichmann was not Austrian

Adolf Eichmann was listed as prominent native austrian German. But he was born in Solingen, Germany, so he was not native austrian. I deleted him from this list. Eromae (talk) 21:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

dear eromae! as an austrian living in austria, and after seeing the tapes from his trial, i can assure you that he was austrian in every way. just like the austrians of jewish religion he sent to the camps. nation is not a question of birthplace. and for the austrian nation, which is of unsure ethnicity, of unsure culture, of unsure language and has/had many members who were born outside of its todays borders (and still manages to be a true nation), his vita is not unusal. 87.243.151.162 (talk) 02:09, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Historically Austrians regarded as Germans!

Historically, Austrians were regarded as Germans due to Austria being part of the Holy Roman Empire until 1806 and German being the official language spoken in Austria. But after the founding of the German Empire in 1871, World War 2, and Nazism, Austrians have developed their own distinct identity.

What is wrong in that it is the exact truth, why are people disagreeing? (keep Austria being part of the German Confederation) out of it like before when I tried to put it in but it wasn't revelant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.238.166.81 (talk) 17:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

No sources, no addition. O Fenian (talk) 17:49, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Concur. See WP:RS and WP:V. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Are you winding me up? There is loads of sources to back it up.

The even article itself here says even after German Empire was created German-speaking Austrians still considered themself German and were counted as cenuses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.238.166.81 (talk) 20:35, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Then citing those sources should present no challenge to you. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 20:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

The user has been blocked for 31 hours for edit warring. On the user's talk page, I've encouraged him/her to make sure s/he cites a reliable source if s/he decides to try to add the information again. – GorillaWarfare ^{talk • contribs} 20:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Austria doesnt consist just of german speaking austrians, so you can't say AUSTRIANS were regarded as germans. This would be discriminating against the croatian, slovenian, hungarian speaking Austrians even today. Some austrians regarded themselves as germans, but not all of them. During the empire there were many austrians who didnt (all the czechs, poles, hungarians, ruthenians,...) and even afterwards the slovenes in carinthia or croats in burgenland were never considered as germans. There IS an austrian identity, there IS an austrian culture. Most austrians dont even have any german ancestors, since todays austria was mostly inhibitated by celts not germanian tribes. So no reason (except for nazis) to call austrians germans. Eromae (talk) 21:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

PS: this would be the same as saying, americans are all british...just because they speak english Eromae (talk) 21:11, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

A lot of Austrians consider themselves to be Ethnically German. I don't think this is about German Austrian identity. This is about which of the pictures has Austrian Nationals, and German Nationals. Which, if you are an Austrian National of German Descent, you would of course be German...

Duh...

"Sources"

Regarding this edit, this is a blog which is not a reliable source, and this is a travel website which does not appear to be a reliable source, and furthermore I cannot see anything on there that sources "Historically, Austrians were regarded as Germans due to Austria being part of The Holy Roman Empire until 1806 and German being the official language spoken in Austria". While it may mention German being the official language of Austria, it does not source the conclusion that "Historically, Austrians were regarded as Germans...". O Fenian (talk) 22:18, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

This source is of questionable reliability and does not source "Historically, Austrians were regarded as Germans due to Austria being part of the Holy Roman Empire until 1806", there is nowhere it draws that conclusion. This source does not even mention 1871 or the German Empire, so it does not source "Following the founding of the German Empire in 1871, World War 2 and Nazism, Austrians have developed their own identity". Since the preceding sentence is not sourced, it makes no sense to leave that sentence in anyway.

I strongly suggest the editor provides sources here for discussion, since this is going badly already. O Fenian (talk) 22:52, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

What about this: Republic of German-Austria?--IIIraute (talk) 14:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

@ O Fenian: If you want sources check out Madame de Staels famous account on Germany "De L'Allemagne" (1813), in which she points out that "The Germans" are split into Bavarians, Austrians, Prussians,... 131.130.224.94 (talk) 12:50, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Where is Hitler?

This ethnic infobox has become a retarded attempt to follow political correctness. Come on, this is encyclopedia, things don't have to look cute here. Italians don't put there Mussolini, Autstrians hide Hitler, even Russians removed Lenin from their infobox. It seems that only Georgians are brave enough to put Stalin on their page and not be such hypocrites. Wikipedia will never win over those trying to hide unwanted or unpopular characters from respective pages, so maybe it is a good reason to get rid of that little galleries completely? They only show how hypocrite and biased Wikipedia is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.59.198.169 (talk) 14:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Hitler is taboo, Stalin is taboo, Mussolini is taboo that is why.

Italians put Napoleon even though he was Corsican.

Also Hitler always considered himself German not Austrian (he was ethnically German). — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeordieWikiEditor (talk • contribs) 12:41, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

That's absolutely not correct so. Hitler considered himself always as Austrian and German. His roots, where his ancestors lived was Lower Austria. But like most German speaking people in the Austria-Hungary empire, he considered the German speaking inhabitants of the empire as part of a German ethnicity. But it's understandable, that Hitler doesn't belong to such a gallery, because it's no good advertisment for a country. Better Mozart, who was no citizen of a Austrian territory and wrote about Germany as his 'beloved fatherland'. But his birthtown belongs today to Austria and he is a better advertisment.

Regarding Stalin: It seems, some people from his birtharea are still proud of him.78.43.102.178 (talk) 13:35, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Isn't that being more unbiased rather than being proud? Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini - those were the people who really stood out and left a HUGE impact on the world. Notorious, but well-known. Wikipedia doesn't have to always look nice. 92.46.182.251 (talk) 19:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

No you are wrong because when he was growing up like most Austrians back then he always called himself a German first and even more so when rebelling against his father and singing the German national anthem and going into the German army not the Austrian army, he always considered Austria part of Germany. --GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 21:29, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

That´s definitely true, but don´t you think that Mozart would have considered Austria a "German" country as well? You see, I am Austrian, and I think that excluding Hitler is denying our "dark side". Austrian participation and guilt concerning WW2, the Holocaust and all these things, used to be denied for a long time. Therefore, in Austria, your exclusion of Hitler from the picture collage could be considered a political statement of that kind, you know, like saying, "we didn´t have anything to doo with this, not us, that´s the Germans´business." Interestingly, he also hasn´t been included in the collage on the "Germans"-page as well, because people there argue that he was Austrian... So, it seems that nobody had ever anything to do with this kind of person, and all are happy.... --Mike F2 (talk) 14:29, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Well said, I agree.--Львівське (говорити) 07:16, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, Hitler was either an ethnic German (but then we do not need this page: "Austrians" as etnic group, because they are NOT an own ethnic group) or Hitler must have been an ethnic Austrian! Same goes for Mozart. Sorry, but can't have it both ways.--IIIraute (talk) 01:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, Mozart is not a good choice – but neither is Hitler. He never identified as an Austrian and is a mass murder. I would change it into someone neutral and honorable – Konrad Lorenz. Andrej N. B. (talk) 22:54, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

That he didn't self-identify as something is questionable justification - it's not his article. To exclude him because he is evil is a whitewash. It's a selection of Austrians, not "nice Austrians". Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, if it is a selection of Austrians he wouldnt be a good choice either - after 1925 he was a German citizen. And - Mussolini is not in the italien article, Franco not in the spanish,... all whitewashed? Andrej N. B. (talk) 23:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

If you have views on the Italians and Spaniards articles adress them there. After 1938 all Austrians were Germans whether they like it or not - that's not more pertinent. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The comparison is not correct since Hitler activly rejected his Austrian citizenship in 1925. Even in WW 1 he did not fight for the A.-H. but the German Army - by choice. Andrej N. B. (talk) 23:42, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

All of this citizenship stuff doesn't even matter. This article says that Austrians are an own ethnic group. This article is about Austrians as a nation and ethnic group - so, Hitler was an ethnic Austrian, so why shouldn't he be part of this article?.--IIIraute (talk) 23:44, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

(P.S. I am fine with Lorenz...... but, to be clear on this one.... if there is no Hitler - there is no Mozart!).--IIIraute (talk) 00:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

The concept of ethnic Austrians only became prominent after World War II, and Austrian ethnicity became popular precisely because Austrians did not want to be associated with Germany due to Nazi atrocities ordered by Hitler. Prior to World War II, Austrian identity WAS not based on ethnicity but it was based on a civic nationalism - that Austrians were Catholic Germans who did not want to be part of the Germany developed by Bismarck because they viewed it as a Protestant and Prussian dominated state as demonstrated by Bismarck's anti-Catholic Kulturkampf; as such they supported Austrian independence. Not all Austrians shared this view nor this civic Catholic-German identity, pan-Germanists like Hitler identified themselves as Germans alone with no prefixes nor religious conditions of allegiance to their ethnicity. Hitler despised the very existence of an independent Austrian state, he did not identify as an ethnic Austrian, and definitions of ethnicity do not merely rely on geneaology, but they rely on culture and language - as such they require a conformity of an individual to those factors and Hitler did not conform to the Austrian culture of promoting itself as an Catholic-German society free from Protestant and Prussian domination, Hitler did not support such culture.--R-41 (talk) 08:45, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Considering that Austrian ethnic identity only arose as prominent after World War II, I believe that neither Hitler, nor Mozart, nor any pre-1945 era Austrian citizens should be included on the list if their is no evidence of them identifying themselves as part of Austrian ethnicity. The infobox should only include people who self-identified as being part of an Austrian ethnicity and not citizenship.--R-41 (talk) 08:58, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Confusing

Does Austrians in this article only refer to German speaking Austrian natives? _{(unsigned comment)}

• Today´s Austria only consists of german-languaged regions. In former days (in the Austrian Empire), there have been regions that were not speaking German (e.g. Hungary), but today it is not. --BeanMe (talk) 14:35, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• • Not true. Just have a look at "languages" in the box on the right-hand side of the article. Nahabedere (talk) 21:32, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Would it not be worth adding at the top about Austrians historically being regarded as "Austrian Germans" but now have developed their own distinct national identity?

Would something along the lines of "Historically, Austrians were regarded as Austrian Germans due to Austria being part of the Holy Roman Empire until it was dissolved in 1806 and the German Confederation until the Austro-Prussian war in 1866 which consequently excluded Austria and the six million Austrian Germans from Germany. Following the founding of the nation-state German Empire in 1871 and the events of World War II and Nazism, Austrians have developed their own distinct national identity."

I (as well as others) can back this up with cited sources and books but this would be good to mention and it is mentioned in the article further down but is a key information, I'm not saying "Austrians are Germans" now at all but before 1945 the distinct national identity was not separate or as broad as what it is today since 1945, I do think this is worth backing up as a key point as important to understand how things are different now and the quick bit of Austria's history.

I of course will not vandalise the page and ask before adding this, but I definitely think it's worth mentioning.--SubaruImpreza2.0 (talk) 03:31, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I totally agree with you, an (german)Austrian identity was established only after WW2. Before the term Austrian refered to the Austro-Hungarian Empire and was a political term not a ethnical term.--Dappsi (talk) 12:06, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Mozart should be in the portrait section.

Probably the most famous Austrian (and composer) in history.46.194.242.185 (talk) 15:37, 10 August 2012 (UTC)