Talk:Julius Streicher

Julius Streicher reversion

Beyond My Ken, you reverted my edit with the evasive excuse that it was poorly written. Aside from my disliked copy efforts, it seems that you considered a mere futility from my side to have:

• Replaced a totally false assertion, without citation (Wechsler-Bellevue IQ test) with the correct one, with citation (Rorschach test),
• Corrected a typo (anti=Semitic),
• Removed {{fakeheader}} as per WP:PSEUDOHEAD and Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Discord,
• Revamped the use of the English language by reducing the overuse of German words, as per WP policies..

Shouldn't your action be castigated for infringing, by using vague motivations, the right of others to pursue an improvement? Carlotm (talk) 08:50, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

It's not at all "evasive", your re-write was poor, and yopu've been told that your interpretation of the you of "fakeheader" is neither policy nor mandatory. Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:10, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

You continue to be evasive, not considering at all the facts I listed above, which have nothing to do with poor writing. About "fakeheader", it is not my interpretation, is Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)'s. Carlotm (talk) 21:02, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Not evasive in the least, a simple statement: your edit did not improve the article. If you think otherwise, specify here in what ways you improved it -- not by the writing, that's for certain. As for "fakeheader", you seem to be under the impression that on Wikipedia, everything not specifically allowed is forbidden, whereas, in actuality, anything not specifically forbidden is allowed' -- and per WP:IAR, sometimes even "forbidden" things are allowed. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:48, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

So, you're trying to tell us that your re-written paragraph:

In April 1933, after the Nazi party gained total control of the German state apparatus, Streicher organised a one-day boycott of Jewish businesses which was used as a dress-rehearsal for other anti-Semitic commercial measures. Shortly Streicher came to rule the city of Nuremberg and "his" Franconia unopposedly, and boasted that every Jew had been removed from Hersbruck. Among the nicknames provided by his enemies were "King of Nuremberg" and, as Nazi leader (Gauleiter) of Franconia, the "Beast of Franconia", and the "Führer of Franconia" (Frankenführer).

is superior to the paragraph that was there already:

In April 1933, after Nazi control of the German state apparatus gave the Gauleiters enormous power, Streicher organised a one-day boycott of Jewish businesses which was used as a dress-rehearsal for other anti-Semitic commercial measures. As he consolidated his hold on power, he came to more or less rule the city of Nuremberg and his Gau Franken, and boasted that every Jew had been removed from Hersbruck. Among the nicknames provided by his enemies were "King of Nuremberg" and the "Beast of Franconia." Because of his role as Gauleiter of Franconia, he also gained the nickname of Frankenführer.

Is that your claim? Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

• If you have facts to add, them them with as little change of the text as possible, as you have shown that your writing is not up to the quality required in a Wikipedia article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:03, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

You seem not to appreciate my attempt on reducing the intrusiveness of German terms and vacuous phrasing like " As he consolidated his hold on power". Carlotm (talk) 06:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

If by that you mean that I think your re-phrasings and re-writing did not improve the article, then, yes, you are correct. And, BTW, there is absolutely nothing "vacuous" about "As he consolidated his hold on power" - so I suggest that you might limit your contributions to Wikipedia to the addition of facts (properly sourced) and not to copy-editing, as your appreciation of what is good and what is bad in that arena seems somewhat tenuous. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:56, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

In fact I was unable to find any source asserting Streicher's need to consolidate his hold on power in 1933. His adjustment to the wealth of power that fell on him after the rise of the Nazis in Berlin can be easily expressed with "soon", "shortly" and the like. The longer phrasing, if one pretends to consider it somehow different than vacuous, must imply the occurrence, yet improbable, of some political difficulties. Carlotm (talk) 05:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Controversy over his execution

Surely his execution for speech and speech alone was controversial, even among those that though his antisemitic views deserved punishment? We should seek out views of notable people past or present that criticized the allies for executing him on offensive speech grounds alone (rather then as a result of any actions) while supporting imprisonment and include those views in the article. --2600:1700:56A0:4680:F537:E917:3525:50A0 (talk) 22:04, 31 July 2018 (UTC)