A fact from Bavarian Soviet Republic appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 November 2004. The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
She was listed as one of the leaders of the government but that's quite impossible since she was executed by firing squad in Jan 1919. Please dont add her back. TY — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.122.163.252 (talk) 03:25, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This sentence is vague to me as a naive reader. Did the Communist Party have an electoral victory, or was there a forceful coup? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.13.130.154 (talk) 09:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would entirely remove the map from the article as it not only appears to be a poorly adapted version of a larger map of Germany (e.g. names of French cities (Colmar, Strasbourg) visibly cut off, very crude borders of the grey shade etc.) but in addition to that depicts the Bavarian border after the 1920 accession of the Coburg area following a referendum. Since the general information provided by the map imo isn't all that crucial to the article in the first place, I don't see the harm in simply taking it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.21.62.21 (talk) 16:24, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I took the initiative to move this article from Munich Soviet Republic because most English language academic sources refer to it as Bavarian Soviet Republic. I intend to spend a lot of time improving this article, and look forward to any one else who may want to contribute. —ExplorerCDT 05:24, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
If the article is in "History of Bavaria" category (which is a subcategory of "German history" and "Germany") there's no need to put it in "Germany" and "German history" categories as well. This is the category policy of Wikipedia.
That is because otherwise would make hard to browse the main categories, as for example "Germany", because there would be too many topics on them. The same way, we put a German musician under the "German musicians" category and not in the category "People". Bogdan | Talk 17:50, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Bavaria is a part of germany,and putting history of Bavaria separate is like putting Hurricane Katrina to Texas/Lousiana History.Its should be included,and size of category isn't a valid argument . "Harder to browse" would be hard to navigate many topics far exceeding germany categories. And for the record grouping people by nationality isn't a really good idea in perspective(emigrants,travellers,national minorities,etc) and better adressed by grouping in terms of subject area(i.e. Profession,Religion,Occupation) internationally. ex:German scientists vs scientists by field(Chemists,physicists,Biologists)
The article says that a prince of the House of Thurn and Taxis was executed for spying by the revolutionaries, but I haven't found any further information about this individual on the web. The German article does not mention anyone from the house, and the Thurn und Taxis article does not have any princes dying in 1919. Is there a source for this inclusion in the article? Olessi 22:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[1] Aufgabe 10 Was wird den roten Exekutionskommandos in München allerdings zum Verhängnis? Wo gehen sie zu weit?
Lösungshinweis: Nach der Erschießung des Grafen Thurn und Taxis und der Gräfin Westphal schlägt die Stimmung unter der Bevölkerung endgültig um. Die Bürger haben genug; in München stationierte Soldaten wenden sich nun gegen die Räte-Anhänger.
This infobite seems to be an angle to pursue. Agathoclea 08:29, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Per Naming Conventions (common names), I reverted this page back to Bavarian Soviet Republic from its 3 month captivity at Munich Soviet Republic. Why? Because BSR is the common name in English especially given its academic usage compared to MSR. If the Germans refer to it differently, let them do so on the German Wikipedia. —ExplorerCDT 03:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article seems to violate the Neutral Point of View. Why, for instance, does it make a specific point of naming several of the "counter-revolutionaries" executed by the Rote Armee, but only mentions Leviné when discussing the state's reaction? Also, why does it only mention actions taken by the Communists against the state, but not actions taken by the state (prior to, during, and after the November Revolution) against Communists and workers? This article fails to even account for the causes of the Revolution, except as an indirect result of the October Revolution in Russia.Alexandergreenb (talk) 03:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article says (with no sources) that the Freikorps killed 700 people after destroying the Bavarian Soviet Republic. Is that not a good enough reaction for you? The article states that the communist revolution in Hungary emboldened the revolutionaries. A failure to fully account for the causes of the state's formation doesn't mean that the article is biased, just bad. MustaphaMond (talk) 00:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article claims that Russian soldiers were sent to execute hostages; considering that Russia was in the midst of a civil war and separated both by multiple enemies and enormous distances from Bavaria, this seems extremely unlikely. The source that supports this does not seem to be of a high quality, especially for such extraordinary claim. Therefore I'm removing it from the article until a better source is found. Kostja (talk) 16:42, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This part of the article is very poorly written and reads like biased analysis. In particular this phrase, 'the majority of German Jews were patriotic Germans who did great service for Germany'.
"The tragic and unfortunate events related to establishment of the Bavarian Soviet Republic was that the Nazi propagandists used the action of a small group of Jewish activists to attack the entire German Jewish community. The fact was that the majority of German Jews were patriotic Germans who did great service for Germany but the Nazis exploited the actions of the Spartacus League to claim that this was a anti-German "Jewish conspiracy" and used this to create anti-Jewish hatred and the tragic events of the Holocaust." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack Paris Cernunnos (talk • contribs) 11:37, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A Bavarian Soviet Republic has never existed. I propose to delete this article. Here are my arguments:
These arguments prove that Bavaria was not an Soviet Republic at any time. I propose that this short period may be called "Period of experimental socialism in Munich". I propose to delete this article and transfer its contents to an article with a better name.
--Mnntoino (talk) 19:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
IsVolkstaat Bayern, another common name from the period, a reference to this particular polity? —Brigade Piron (talk) 21:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There is absolutely no call for this to be in the opening sentence of this page. The implication of this phrasing suggests that the leadership was organised on the basis of their Judaism and not simply the result of the socialists involved in the several varied leaderships of the short lived republic happening to be ethnically Jewish. It's only relevance to the page is in how critics and propagandists would paint the republic afterwards and this is already addressed in the article.
The citation given to back up the claim of a team of Jewish revolutionaries uses the word "Jewish" twice in relation to the republic. Once while describing Eisner and again when describing the perceptions of critics of the republic. A single ethnically Jewish leader does not constitute a "Team of Jewish Revolutionaries" and the other reference to the top leadership being Russian or Jewish does not add any more to what we already know that the top figure in each leadership was an ethnic Jew.
There was no single leadership of this republic as is quite clear from the article itself. There was an Eisner leadership, a Hoffmann leadership, a Toller leadership, a Leviné leadership. While three out of those four leaders were Jewish that only backs a claim that three out of four attempted leaders of the republic were Jews. It does not back a claim that it was an attempt at a socialist republic "led mainly by a team of Jewish revolutionaries". That would suggest a single coherent team of exclusively Jewish revolutionaries led the republic through the course of its short existence which simply isn't true and quite honestly sounds more like NSDAP propaganda from the time than a wikipedia article. The fact that the author of this edit also contributes to the page for Nazism does raise suspicions about the motives of their edit.
If the user wants to elaborate in the article on the over representation of ethnically Jewish socialists in the various governments and the effects that had then they can do so elsewhere in the article with appropriate sources. But it has no place in the opening sentence any more than than the Irish-American origin of the President of the short-lived Irish Republic has in its opening sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnSionnachín (talk • contribs) 15:56, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I will modify as "... led by a team of German and Russian revolutionaries, mostly of Jewish descent." K.e.coffman (talk) 01:01, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that this should not be in the lede.User:Volunteer Marek 05:20, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Surely this guy [3] deserves a Wikipedia article of his own ? He has one in the French language Wikipedia [4] but not the English. He even appears to have a street named after him in Eggenfelden, Southeastern Bavaria. 90.202.231.149 (talk) 21:47, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bavarian Soviet Republic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:46, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There should be a discussion related to fringe theory warning applied to this section KhoikhoiPossum (talk) 21:46, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There has been a lot of argument (or contradiction) about the following paragraph:
"Adolf Hitler himself acted as a liaison between his army battalion – he had been elected "deputy battalion representative" – and the Soviet's Department of Propaganda. Both film footage and a still photograph appear to show Hitler marching in Eisner's funeral procession. He wears both a black mourning band and a red band showing support for the Far-Left Government. It is uncertain whether this indicated that Hitler was a true supporter of the soviet, or that he was simply taking an available opportunity not to return to his impoverished pre-war civilian life. His choice may therefore have been a tactical one, rather than one of political belief. It is also known that once the government had fallen, Hitler aligned himself with the Weimar Republic and – as part of a three-person committee assigned to investigate the behavior of his regiment's soldiers – informed on those who had shown sympathy for the Far-Left Governments.[1][2]"
I don't know anything about the reliability or respectability of the source cited. Can anybody help us? The editor who removes the paragraph says loudly,"Hitler was not a socialist." I agree but the party he led later on was called the National Socialist Party. It seems he wanted to attract socialists to his cause. The paragraph would tie in with this.but is it true.Spinney Hill (talk) 07:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC) .Spinisney Hill (talk) 07:30, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The source cited is wrong. This is because Hitler was a FASCIST member of the FASCIST Nazi party and he WAS NOT a socialist. This myth persists because it benefits Republicans, Trump supporters and other fascists to discredit socialism by falsely associating Hitler with it. This is extremely dangerous and puts BIPOC people such as myself in even further danger from Fascists. The above paragraph must be removed and stay removed as it only contributes to this myth. Lending legitimacy to the idea Hitler was a socialist is no different to lending legitimacy to other fringe right wing beliefs like pizzagate and that Trump 'won' (HE DID NOT) the 2020 election.
The paragraph immediately above was not written by me so I have put my signature where it belongs. The editor above has not signed his contribution. He appears to be saying not that the source quoted is factually incorrect but morally wrong even if it is correct to use it. Please do not shout by using capitals. I am afraid I do not know what BIPOC means so I cannot comment on that. However this article is about an event which took place in Germany in the period immediately after the First World war. It certainly has an impact on German politics in the 1920s and 1930s but it is not about US politics in the 2020s. I take it the editor refers to the US Republican Party when he talks about "Republicans. " In Germany in 1919 republican meant not royal or imperialist. Spinney Hill (talk) 11:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bavarian Soviet Republic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:54, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've made two substantial changes to this article. The first is that I've removed as much of the contributions of the editor HenryGarden1000 as I could, since their edits are suspect - one particular one I removed the source did not support the claim made. Secondly, I've removed the material based on the writing of a single historian, Thomas Weber, which appears to me to be promoting WP:FRINGE theories which are not accepted by the community of historians.
I suggest that those who have a good amount of knowledge about this subject matter take a very close look at the article and continue to chip away at material which is not well-sourced, is fringy, or outright incorrect.
I'll post this on WikiProject Germany as well. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:14, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So this country has an unrecognizable flag right? MakesTheWikiBetter (talk) 23:01, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many of the anecdotes in here, while seemingly coming from different sources, trace back to one book called "La Terreur en Bavière", published in 1922 without sources. It seems the majority of the extraordinary anecdotes come from this book (although it is very hard to tell as I cannot read French). It doesn't seem like this is a good source but I do not know enough about academic standard's in genral, and wikipedia's standards in particular to really dispute this. I would however suggest someone look into La Terreur en Bavière by Ambroise Got to see how legitimate of a source it is
This article seems to be heavily relying on extremely shoddy English language scholarship derived from people with obvious bias (such as uncritically and directly citing Noske) to make wildly exagerated claims (which has been widely disseminated online). While I don't speak German, a brief view of the German page translated by Google does not reproduce annecdotes like attempting to abolish the study of history. S0V3R31GNN0RT0N (talk) 13:08, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The section about the government appointments under the Ernst Toller government after a statetment saying that
"Toller's government members were not always well-chosen."
contains the passage
"(...) and – in Catholic Bavaria, where nuns ran the schools – a Jew as minister for education."
I fail to see any connection between the minister being Jewish and their unability to run/reform a Catholic run education system other than an anti-semitic bias in the article. Kubaxent (talk) 17:39, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]