Changes

:::*You are thinking of a different Wiki, namely the one we are competing against.  Here you don't replace another user's work without first going over your proposed changes and then tell him how dare you intervene when he reverts it back.  You are out of bounds. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:46, 28 November 2007 (EST)   

:::*You are thinking of a different Wiki, namely the one we are competing against.  Here you don't replace another user's work without first going over your proposed changes and then tell him how dare you intervene when he reverts it back.  You are out of bounds. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:46, 28 November 2007 (EST)   

::::I think [User:Philip_J._Rayment| Philip's] comment at the bottom of the page says what has to be said about this. [[User:Order|Order]] 07:29, 28 November 2007 (EST)

::::I think [User:Philip_J._Rayment| Philip's] comment at the bottom of the page says what has to be said about this. [[User:Order|Order]] 07:29, 28 November 2007 (EST)

:*The reparations were to be paid over 42 years.  Of course they were never fully paid, but that's a misnomer isn't it?  Discussions on postponing or changing payments occurred after Germany's financial collapse, and often did not include France.  You are aware of the French occupation of the Ruhr and shooting German workers who tried to walk off the job, right?  While I don't think we need to go into great detail in the Germany article, anything that whitewashes the severity of the reparations as they were put into place and implemented is counter to history.   

:*The reparations were to be paid over 42 years.  Of course they were never fully paid, but that's a misnomer isn't it?  Discussions on postponing or changing payments occurred after Germany's financial collapse, and often did not include France.  You are aware of the French occupation of the Ruhr and shooting German workers who tried to walk off the job, right?  While I don't think we need to go into great detail in the Germany article, anything that whitewashes the severity of the reparations as they were put into place and implemented is counter to history.   

::Discussion about changing the terms of the reparation payments were already going on before the hyper-inflation. Some even accuse t the German government of causing  hyper-inflation  on purpose because to prove the point at the negotiation table that the payments were unreasonable.

::Discussion about changing the terms of the reparation payments were already going on before the hyper-inflation. Some even accuse t the German government of causing  hyper-inflation  on purpose because to prove the point at the negotiation table that the payments were unreasonable.

::Sure they are. But saying that Hitler was caused by hyper-inflation, was caused by the treaty of Versailles, is just an excuse. Neither of them was inevitable.

::Sure they are. But saying that Hitler was caused by hyper-inflation, was caused by the treaty of Versailles, is just an excuse. Neither of them was inevitable.

::* Just out of curiosity, where do you believe you see the word inevitable used? [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:46, 28 November 2007 (EST)

::* Just out of curiosity, where do you believe you see the word inevitable used? [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:46, 28 November 2007 (EST)

:::Nowhere, but the explanation was fairly mono-causal, even "inevitable" wasn't used, while it is generally accepted that quite a few quases came together. But all we have to do is to make sure that the article says clearly that it wasn't inevitable. [[User:Order|Order]] 07:29, 28 November 2007 (EST)  

:::Nowhere, but the explanation was fairly mono-causal, even "inevitable" wasn't used, while it is generally accepted that quite a few quases came together. But all we have to do is to make sure that the article says clearly that it wasn't inevitable. [[User:Order|Order]] 07:29, 28 November 2007 (EST)

:*Hitler was a struggling artist who was able to found a movement that slowly gained power.  Political movements are formed over time.  Based on what you are saying above, the occupation of any person in power would always be political activist.  Hitler's attempt to rise to power predated the 1930's by many years.  Mein Kampf sold because he was in prison because of his earlier unsuccesful attempts at activism.  And he was, in those turbulent times, one of many.

:*Hitler was a struggling artist who was able to found a movement that slowly gained power.  Political movements are formed over time.  Based on what you are saying above, the occupation of any person in power would always be political activist.  Hitler's attempt to rise to power predated the 1930's by many years.  Mein Kampf sold because he was in prison because of his earlier unsuccesful attempts at activism.  And he was, in those turbulent times, one of many.

::When did his struggling as an artist happened? In the 1910s. At the time of the depression he was not struggling, so it wasn't a struggling artist that got to power, but a political activist and politician, who he made money selling his book and by donations from political friends. Just like others, indeed, but he wasn't struggling as an artist when the Depression started.

::When did his struggling as an artist happened? In the 1910s. At the time of the depression he was not struggling, so it wasn't a struggling artist that got to power, but a political activist and politician, who he made money selling his book and by donations from political friends. Just like others, indeed, but he wasn't struggling as an artist when the Depression started.

:: I think that this the interbellum shouldn't be discussed in to much detail this article. We got articles on Weimar, Hitler, and WWII. We should keep it brief, link to those articles, and avoid the simplistic myth, that the 3rd Reich was an immediate cause of the treaty of Versailles. And I see now reason why we would be able to agree on that. And btw, I did work from your version, and merged it with bit I took from other articles on CP. [[User:Order|Order]] 20:08, 27 November 2007 (EST)

:: I think that this the interbellum shouldn't be discussed in to much detail this article. We got articles on Weimar, Hitler, and WWII. We should keep it brief, link to those articles, and avoid the simplistic myth, that the 3rd Reich was an immediate cause of the treaty of Versailles. And I see now reason why we would be able to agree on that. And btw, I did work from your version, and merged it with bit I took from other articles on CP. [[User:Order|Order]] 20:08, 27 November 2007 (EST)

::* Interesting considering your version actually increased the size of the section. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:46, 28 November 2007 (EST)

::* Interesting considering your version actually increased the size of the section. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:46, 28 November 2007 (EST)

:::That is what happens if you add and merge different bits. It grows. I get the impression that you just cannot stand it that someone worked on you version. [[User:Order|Order]] 06:49, 28 November 2007 (EST)  

:::That is what happens if you add and merge different bits. It grows. I get the impression that you just cannot stand it that someone worked on you version. [[User:Order|Order]] 06:49, 28 November 2007 (EST)

To save us some time about what I know and what I do not know about Hitlers rise to power, take some time an look at the talk pages of the Hitler article, and see what I said there about Hitlers rise to power: [[Talk:Adolf_Hitler]] and [[Talk:Adolf_Hitler/Archive1]]. You might also look at the history of the Hitler article, and look who introduced mayor things about the beer hall putsch, and the night of long knives. This might tell you that I do know that Hitler was active before, and that he killed his opponents. And now, act like you name suggest and work together on this rather short paragraph.[[User:Order|Order]] 06:49, 28 November 2007 (EST)

To save us some time about what I know and what I do not know about Hitlers rise to power, take some time an look at the talk pages of the Hitler article, and see what I said there about Hitlers rise to power: [[Talk:Adolf_Hitler]] and [[Talk:Adolf_Hitler/Archive1]]. You might also look at the history of the Hitler article, and look who introduced mayor things about the beer hall putsch, and the night of long knives. This might tell you that I do know that Hitler was active before, and that he killed his opponents. And now, act like you name suggest and work together on this rather short paragraph.[[User:Order|Order]] 06:49, 28 November 2007 (EST)

==Revert War ==

==Revert War ==

:* 'great depression... Adolf Hitler to rise up on the scene...'  Hitler was active well before the great depression and the conditions that allowed him to be active existed before the Great Depression.  This skirts the first 10 years of hardship in Germany from the end of WWI until the Depression itself.

:* 'great depression... Adolf Hitler to rise up on the scene...'  Hitler was active well before the great depression and the conditions that allowed him to be active existed before the Great Depression.  This skirts the first 10 years of hardship in Germany from the end of WWI until the Depression itself.

::First, the sentence that Hitler rose to the scene during the great depression is from your version; I left it as it was, only changed "struggling artists" to "Adolf Hitler". Because he wasn't a struggling artist, anymore.

::First, the sentence that Hitler rose to the scene during the great depression is from your version; I left it as it was, only changed "struggling artists" to "Adolf Hitler". Because he wasn't a struggling artist, anymore.

::If you don't believe me, here is an article from [http://www.welt.de/print-welt/article359035/Hitler_zahlte_keine_Einkommensteuer.html Die Welt]. Hitler was not a struggling artist. First, he claimed at the tax office that his occupation was writer, and not artist. Second, he wasn't exactly struggling. In 1925 the taxation office got suspicious  when Hitler bought a luxury car for RM 20.000. While he claimed to have had an annual income between somewhere between RM 11.000 and RM 19.000 during those golden years. Apparently he didn't report all of his income, because he managed to incur a tax debt of RM 400.000 until he got into power. You need to earn quite a bit, if you can incur that much tax debt. Needless to say that this debt was waived when he came into power. Anyway, he wasn't struggling, but claimed to have an income worth half a luxury car a year, while in just a few years he managed to amass a tax debt worth 20 luxury cars. I don't call that struggling.   

::If you don't believe me, here is an article from [http://www.welt.de/print-welt/article359035/Hitler_zahlte_keine_Einkommensteuer.html Die Welt]. Hitler was not a struggling artist. First, he claimed at the tax office that his occupation was writer, and not artist. Second, he wasn't exactly struggling. In 1925 the taxation office got suspicious  when Hitler bought a luxury car for RM 20.000. While he claimed to have had an annual income between somewhere between RM 11.000 and RM 19.000 during those golden years. Apparently he didn't report all of his income, because he managed to incur a tax debt of RM 400.000 until he got into power. You need to earn quite a bit, if you can incur that much tax debt. Needless to say that this debt was waived when he came into power. Anyway, he wasn't struggling, but claimed to have an income worth half a luxury car a year, while in just a few years he managed to amass a tax debt worth 20 luxury cars. I don't call that struggling.

::* This is a red herring and you know it.  Hitler's monetary gains were coming because he was gaining followers.  When he was first becoming a revolutionary his previous means of support had been as a struggling artist. And as you are also aware, it doesn't have to be an either/or.  His struggling artist and revolutionary paths can both be mentioned, and are. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 13:15, 28 November 2007 (EST)

:* Even if your section was perfect, the idea that you see nothing wrong with the section that requires reversion misses the point of the proper way to discuss and implement changes.  But that is already discussed above so I will leave it at that. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 04:54, 28 November 2007 (EST)

:* Even if your section was perfect, the idea that you see nothing wrong with the section that requires reversion misses the point of the proper way to discuss and implement changes.  But that is already discussed above so I will leave it at that. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 04:54, 28 November 2007 (EST)

::I saw quite some mistakes and omissions  myself, and was and still am happy to cooperate. And you might have noticed that quite a few of your sentences survived my changes and additions. None of mine were kept in your reversions. And i saw nothing wrong inserting bits from other articles that are already on CP. Sorry, if that was wrong, but I figured that citing other articles on CP, wouldn't be problematic. [[User:Order|Order]] 08:38, 28 November 2007 (EST)  

::I saw quite some mistakes and omissions  myself, and was and still am happy to cooperate. And you might have noticed that quite a few of your sentences survived my changes and additions. None of mine were kept in your reversions. And i saw nothing wrong inserting bits from other articles that are already on CP. Sorry, if that was wrong, but I figured that citing other articles on CP, wouldn't be problematic. [[User:Order|Order]] 08:38, 28 November 2007 (EST)  

Perhaps one (or both?) of you need(s) to reread [[Help:Editing Etiquette|Editing Etiquette]].  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:37, 27 November 2007 (EST)

Perhaps one (or both?) of you need(s) to reread [[Help:Editing Etiquette|Editing Etiquette]].  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:37, 27 November 2007 (EST)