Talk:Sturmabteilung

Put your text for the new page here. I'm trying to find information on a Dr Oskar Heymann who was an early member of the SA and also on a Dipl.hort. Max Muller of Schweizarei Seehof Bamberg. I recently received documents on both these individuals and am trying to find anything on them. Thanks for any help you may give.

Gary Nichols----gnic231432@earthlink.net

Date conflict?

The list of leaders states that Emil Maurice was the leader of the Sturmabteilung from 1920 to 1921. But the text says that the group was formed by Hitler in 1921. Is this correct? If so, it should be addressed in the text somehow. Tablesaw 19:33, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)

The page on [[Ernst_R%F6hm]] states "At the end of the war, Roehm founded the "Freikorps", a right-wing militia, in Munich. In 1920, he became an Nazi-party member and the Freikorps became Hitler's Brownshirts - the Sturmabteilung (SA)." The information on this page appears to be incorrect. Refer [1]. - porge 06:56, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Stormtroopers not just Sturmabteilung

There is something wrong with the links. I followed link to stormtroopers from trench warfare, and i don't want to know about SA, but about German tactics to break defenses in WWI ...Szopen 09:59, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hello, I am not sure about the common english translation of "Sturmabteilung" and "Sturmtruppen", since I am not a native speaker. But I know for sure, that in german these two words have distinct meanings. The first is described in the article, the second is a form of infantry (a real military unit, not paramiliary). So I think the redirect from Stormtropper to Sturmabteilung is wrong.

I've made Stormtrooper a disambiguation page. We now need an article – or a link to an existing article – on Strumtruppen and/or stormtroops in general. –Hajor 22:38, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I don't know German, but I do know that the differences between the Storm-troopers of the Germany army (in both World Wars) and the Storm-troopers of the Nazi party are two different organizations/concepts, and so should have two different pages. They could reference each other, but there is reason (that I see) to combine them.

The real trouble is that the English translation "Storm-trooper" or "Stormtrooper" is a total misnomer. "Sturmabteilung" should never have been translated that way in first place. The word "Abteilung" in military usage is translated as "detachment" or "detail". So, "storm detachment" would have been much nearer the mark. But, I guess, "trooper" sounds so much tougher, and so much closer to what the average German is imagined to be like. "Abteilung" is a much more neutral term than is thought, every private commercial company or firm has various "Abteilungen", or "departments", "sections", or "divisions".

So, I am afraid, we as English-speakers have got ourselves into a bit of of a

blind alley, out of which we are unable to escape, unless we totally re-translate the word "Sturmabteilung" radically. Dieter Simon 00:51, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strumatbielung and Stoormtrooper should not be merged - SA in English is used almost exclusively to refer to the the Nazi organisation, not to Stormtroopers in genreal. Sturmtruppen can be kept for this, at least in English Wikipedia, the German Wikipedia can follow the correct German practice. Phil alias Harry 02:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pronounciation

Just a minor thing, really. I pronounce it as Stur-mab-tay-lung. I usually can't pronounce new words properly until I've heard them, so its probably incorrect.

Remembering my German rules of pronunciation, it should be sturm-ab-tie-lung. --oknazevad 04:41, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The first one is correct. Andreas 09:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Andreas: sturm-ab-tie-lung like "mile" or "tile", not "fail" or "sail", to put it in other words. Dieter Simon 01:06, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blackshirts

~~So what were blackshirts? The SS or an Italian Fascist militia? This article makes both claims. The blackshirts article claims the latter. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 21:24, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)~~ Never mind. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 21:25, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

Following the Night of the Long Knives

What happened to the SA after the Night of the Long Knives and during World War II ? What did all it's members do, and what was it's organizational role? Who joined it?

Brownshirts

I think this article should be moved to brownshirts as that is how they are usually described in English. Also the term stormtrooper should be dropped as that word has a specific meaning in English (see the article on stormtrooper) --Philip Baird Shearer 01:28, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Google:

about 31,400 English pages for brownshirts SA -wikipedia
about 28,900 English pages for brownshirts SA -Sturmabteilung -wikipedia
about 16,000 English pages for Sturmabteilung SA -wikipedia
about 13,400 English pages for -brownshirts SA Sturmabteilung -wikipedia

So there are about 3,000 articles with both words in them and brownshirts is about twice as common as Sturmabteilung --Philip Baird Shearer 01:28, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brownshirts is a "nickname" for the SA given by English sources. It also can refers to any member of the Nazi Party. I totally oppose such a move. Also, even without checking, I am sure that violates several portions of the Wikipedia naming conventions. -Husnock 03:25, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would also oppose such a move. The correct name is Sturmabteilung, and the nickname (both in English and German) was brownshirts (Braunhemden). Andreas 09:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Husnock - redirects are all that are needed. Ck lostsword|^queta! 16:51, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, too, "brownshirts" was a nickname. Dieter Simon 01:06, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Röhm a Homosexual?

~~While reading the article, I had stumbled upon this in the History section:~~ ~~:"Röhm was unpopular in the party because others saw his ambition as threatening their own, and because he was a homosexual."~~ ~~Although I was slightly amused by the "and because he was a homosexual" statement, unless there is a verifiable source for this, it should be removed. 68.106.55.187 01:05, 20 April 2006 (UTC)~~ Ahh, I guess I'm wrong. :) -- 68.106.55.187 06:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]