Talk:Angela Merkel/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Angela Merkel. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Her fingers, hand pose, superglue picture

So there's this picture of her floating around the internet that shows her doing that same exact hand pose where she touches her fingers together and it usually has the caption "superglue: use it carefully / be careful with it / don't stick your fingers in it."

You can see it here... http://lh3.ggpht.com/_9F9_RUESS2E/TGxEpaSxitI/AAAAAAAADf0/aGeoMB7mQ9k/s800/pod0018-merkel-superglue.jpg ...and here... http://www.google.com/search?q=careful%20with%20superglue&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=np&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&biw=911&bih=366

Any reasons for this? Why is it not mentioned? Is it Illuminati symbolism? Discuss.

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doubledragons (talk • contribs) 02:55, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

from...until?

For me, the sentence "was the Chancellor of Germany from 22 November 2005 until 07 October 2011" sounds like she isn't the Chancellor anymore. Couldn't we just say "is the Chancellor of Germany since 2005"? 93.233.7.65 (talk) 14:44, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Addition to "Personal Life".

Would it be relevant in this article to include that she is a madly enthusiastic supporter of Futball, both at the German National Team level and Bayern Munich? If no-one objects I will put this in. Old_Wombat (talk) 10:05, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

If she exhibits a quite exceptional interest in football (more than other politicians), I think this would be worthy of note. It would need a reliable source, though, bearing in mind that most politicians can be expected to profess an interest in a national sport that interests many voters, particularly when the national team wins, allowing politicians to bask in the reflected glory. --Boson (talk) 11:07, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll accept your point of view and leave it at that. Old_Wombat (talk) 06:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany former military officer?

This can only be meant to refer to Helmut Schmidt - but it is totally misleading to call him a military officer. He was a conscript in WW II and rose to the rank of a lieutenant, i. e., he was never a professional soldier. None of the German chancellors was. Since English is not my mother tongue, would anybody be kind enough to make the necessary change in the sentence about what other chancellors had studied or done before they became politicians?141.91.129.6 (talk) 13:27, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Angela's surname

Maybe there is a simple explanation related to local customs, but why is it that she keeps her first husband surname (Merkel)? Why isn’t she using her maiden name or even her second –and current- husband’s surname(Sauer)? It’s not like she was an artist and copyrighted her famous name or something.--Magnvss (talk) 23:01, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

When Germans marry, they can choose a joint name or retain their old names. I doubt anyone recorded why she chose to keep her old name. --Boson (talk) 23:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

The same is true in the US.Bostoner (talk) 02:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I've seen this before. When a woman gets an advanced degree or becomes famous, at least in her field, under her married name and then gets divorced, she often keeps that name even after she remarries. This is why some women keep their maiden names. Another reason is that it is the same name as the one on their degree. According to this article, Dr. Merkel first got married in 1977 and received her doctoral degree in 1978.Bostoner (talk) 02:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Rise to Power?

I fear this may connote something a little less democratic than what actually occurred. I recommend a retitling of this section.

128.227.215.224 (talk) 20:41, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Angela's brother Marcus

This page lists Merkel's birthdate as 17 July 1954, but it lists her brother Marcus' birthdate as 7 July 1954. Obviously, barring some exception to the current understanding of biology and human anatomy, these dates are incompatible (unless Marcus is her half-brother, in which case, that should be sourced and changed). Is this a typo? If so, are they twins, and someone simply mis-typed the date? Or are the dates correct and the year is simply off? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinsmith63 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Posture

Does Merkel have a back problem or does she simply have bad posture? 109.175.159.39 (talk) 10:33, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Why don't you ask her? Sca (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Euro crisis

I find it exceedingly odd that this article about one of the world's leading political figures contains only one passing reference to the euro crisis, in which she has played a pivotal role. Hardly a day goes by without some news report of Merkel's comments on the crisis, the rescue fund, the situation of Greece, etc. If this article appeared in a professionally produced encyclopedia, it would contain, say, half a dozen paragraphs about Chancellor Merkel's involvement and policies vis-a-vis the sovereign-debt and euro crises.

Sca (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I was coming on here just to say the same thing. There is absolutely no sense of historical context in this article at all, just a lot of "firsts" - first woman to be this, first chancellor to do that, like it was written in 2005 right after her election. We won't know how the Eurozone situation will resolve itself yet, but surely historians will be looking at Merkel's role closely in later years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.216.30 (talk) 17:44, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Despite the fact that the article currently cites the pronunciation /aŋˈɡeːla/, both in writing and in the accompanying sound file – and even though the footnote says that Merkel wollte immer mit der Betonung auf dem 'e' Angela genannt werden. (Merkel always wanted her first name to be pronounced with the stress on the 'e'.) – the fact is that /ˈaŋɡela/ is the only pronunciation you are ever likely to hear in Germany. One does not always get what one wants, even in the matter of others' pronunciation of one's own name, and even when one is Chancellor of Germany! I think we should, in the first instance, report what Dr Merkel is actually called; the fact that she may have wished that her name were pronounced otherwise is still something worth commenting upon, but I feel that the observation should be confined to the footnote. --Picapica (talk) 19:16, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Feminist symbolism

Good faith OR and speculation, can reopen if there's a source. a13ean (talk) 20:28, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

In group pictures Angela Merkel tends to show the feminist vulva symbol

Hallo there,

I have noticed that AM tends to show (mostly when portrayed in group pictures) the feminist vulva symbol with her hands.
Maybe it's the case to insert something about it like the captioned picture shown on the right...
I don't know if it's the case, so I am kindly awaiting for civil comments before deciding to post it or not (please avoid personal attacks), thanks.
Maurice Carbonaro (talk)

Do you have a reliable source that mentions this? If not, forget it. --Boson (talk) 20:56, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Hallo there Boson (talk), hmm... reliable sources? Well, not really, but I can show a few examples taken from pictures on the web: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. There are thousands of pictures of Angela Merkel on the web and I am sure that given enough time anyone could fine dozens of similar pictures... Thanks for challenging me. Maurice Carbonaro (talk) 11:24, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

There are many pictures with AM holding her hands in this way. But are there any sources backing your interpretation or a confirmation by AM herself, that she does it on purpose?-- Dewritech (talk) 12:46, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

That's a good question: "Does she does it on purpose?". Well, no, I must admit that AFAIC there are no sources backing up my "interpretation" but to be honest my interpretation is that she does it on purpose so that she cross-targets the women electorate in order to gain consensus. Whatever, it's not that important at the end. Thanks for participating to my comment. Maurice Carbonaro (talk) 07:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Languages

The article says Merkel "at school ... learned to speak Russian fluently." Meanwhile, the article on Putin says he "speaks fluent German ... his family used to speak German at home." It would be interesting to know what language the two of them speak when they meet for official talks. Sca (talk) 22:45, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 6 December 2012

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change "currently ranked as the world's fourth most powerful person by the Forbes magazine"

to

"currently ranked as the world's second most powerful person by the Forbes magazine"

as the link to the Forbes list shows that she is second in 2012, she was first in 2011

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Forbes_Magazine%27s_List_of_The_World%27s_Most_Powerful_People

Redwoody86 (talk) 20:16, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Already done Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:38, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

There's still a mention of the fourth place at the end of the "comparisons" section - I would presume that this either needs to be updated to match, or be removed due to redundancy after having been mentioned earlier. caLiber banter 15:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Done This edit made you autoconfirmed, but I fixed it for you. From now on you are able to edit semi-protected pages. Vaca tion 9 17:10, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Angela Merkel in Popular Culture

Hallo enWP, we have now a large article about the topic, named de:Angela Merkel/Öffentliche Wahrnehmung und Inszenierung - ist about scientific background and examples of public insignia, from travelling pantsuit till Merkel-Raute. I assume it would be a nice endeavour to have it translated, but would prefer to have a feedback at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Germany#Angela_Merkel_in_popular_culture. Cheers Serten (talk) 14:12, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

grandfather

Re: this and this. I'm not sure why I'm supposed to "take it to talk" when it's the other editor who is removing sourced text and changing the wording so that it doesn't match the source. Ok, the first time around it was sort of understandable as I had not had the chance to add a source. But that source has since been added so I would appreciate it if the info wasn't arbitrarily removed.

I'm also at a loss as to how this source [1] is supposed to prove anything. No page number, no nothing, just a bear link. All the other sources available describe Merkel's grandfather as a Pole (which is sort of the whole point and why the info is interesting).

Undoing the revert. Volunteer Marek 00:09, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the recent POV pushing → [2] [3] [4]

A new book about Angela Merkel, that was published earlier this year, revealed that her grandfather was a German citizen of Polish origin → Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, page 1915, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916 [5]. This theme was picked up by the sensational press and resulted in a photograph being published, a Polish journalist got from some distant relative (published by the Polish press), that supposedly shows the grandfather of Merkel in a Blue Army uniform. However, this was never confirmed.

Ludwig Kazmierczak was born in Posen, German Empire. His first name was "Ludwig", and he was a German citizen[6] Ludwig, joined the German Imperial Army in 1915, and fought on the western front. It is not known, whether he became a French POW or if he deserted in 1917/1918. That's when it gets tricky: There is the possibility, that he might have raised his arms against the German Empire as a soldier of an army unit that was formed under French command (made from German POWs with Polish origin) of which, in 1918, some units fought in the Allied campaign against the German Empire. However, all of this remained unconfirmed and is pure speculation. "Kämpfte damit also auch Merkels Großvater gegen das Deutsche Kaiserreich? Die "Gazeta Wyborcza" hält dies für wahrscheinlich. Vermutlich geriet Kazmierczak, der 1915 im Alter von 19 Jahren in die deutsche Armee eingezogen wurde und an der Westfront kämpfte, in französische Gefangenschaft oder desertierte. Irgendwie verschlug es ihn dann in das erste Artillerie-Regiment der Haller-Armee. Dieses kämpfte, so der Historiker Jaroslaw Luczak, 1918 in der Champagne gegen die Deutschen. Nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg zog das Regiment in den Krieg gegen die Rote Armee an der polnischen Ostgrenze. Wenn Merkels Großvater nicht krank oder verletzt war, kämpfte er vermutlich auch an dieser Front, bevor er in den 20er Jahren nach Deutschland zog und sich dort in Kasner umbenannte."[7] & "Diese Armee aber hat es in sich für einen Kanzleringroßvater: Sie wurde im Ersten Weltkrieg unter französischem Kommando aus deutschen Kriegsgefangenen polnischer Herkunft gebildet, und zumindest einige ihrer Einheiten haben 1918 in der Champagne gegen Kaiser und Vaterland gekämpft. Fachleute wie der polnische Historiker Wolodzimierz Boriodziej bestätigen dieser Zeitung nun, dass es damit nicht ausgeschlossen sei, dass auch Großvater Kazmierczak die Waffen gegen Deutschland erhoben haben könnte".[8]

Leaving aside the fact that the book clearly states: ...that Ludwig was a German citizen ("deutscher Staatsbürger") who did not feel very bound to his Polish heritage ("Gleichwohl sah sich die Familie auch ihrer polnischen Abstammung verpflichtet. Ludwig Kazmierczak fühlte aber offenbar nicht so"). After WWI and the Treaty of Versailles (Posen now being Polish), he left Posen for Berlin, married a German girl, named his boy "Horst" and changed/Germanized his surname to "Kasner".

But, after all! Relevance? What has all of this to do with Angela Merkel's "Early life"? --IIIraute (talk) 00:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Ummm, first... what exactly is the POV that is being pushed here? That Angela's grandfather was Polish? But... that's... what... all... the... sources... say. And how is this "POV" rather than just some weird IDONTLIKEIT on your part?

Second, of course Ludwig Kazmierczak was a German citizen (although he wasn't born one, obviously). He couldn't have been a "Polish citizen" as Poland didn't exist then, partly because Prussia had grabbed Poznań and Gdańsk from Poland and people in those territories had no choice but to end up as German citizens. By your logic this would mean that "Poles" simply didn't exist at all in the 19th and early 20th century and that they were created ex nihilo in 1919. Or something.

It's incorrect to describe him as "German of Polish origin". "Of Polish origin" is someone who's parents or grandparents were Polish but who themselves is not. Angela Merkel is (partly) "German of Polish origin". Her father was "German of Polish origin". But Ludwig himself was just Polish, straight up. He was "the origin". And that's why the sources call him Polish. For example "Ludwig Kazmierczak was Polish", or "Angela Merkel's grandfather came from Poland". Illraute, the "German of Polish origin" appears to be solely your own invention.

And are you seriously calling the Spiegel "sensationalist press"? With a straight face?

(or Gazeta Wyborcza for that matter?)

Also, I don't see what the purpose is of posting a large chunk of text in German. This is the English Wikipedia and the German text you quote says the same thing that is in the English language sources. That Ludwig was Polish. That he served in the Blue Army. And that that photograph shows this. Another words, the very information you are desperately trying to remove for some reason.

The idea that "this (the photograph) was never confirmed" and that "all of this (?) remained unconfirmed and is pure speculation" is, again, your own invention and original research. The nature of the military uniform was confirmed by historians and experts. As far as I know Angela did not in any way reject the authenticity of the photograph. Neither has anyone else. Except you, a random Wikipedia editor. You're on your own here though.

Finally, the relevance is obvious. You know "relevance" as in "relation" as in "kin". And of course the fact that this got a good bit of attention in the press, internationally, in Germany and in Poland.

Please undo your revert. Volunteer Marek 01:07, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

"According to the largest Polish daily "Gazeta Wyborcza," her grandfather Ludwig Kazmierczak was Polish and is believed to have fought against the Germans as a Polish soldier in 1918." According to this Polish newspaper, he was an ethnic Pole, however it is a fact that he was a German citizen. What "is believed" means, I think you do know. An Encyclopedia is not really about believing. Also, could you please point out the exact passage in "Der Spiegel" that states that he was not a German, but a Polish citizen! I hope you know that all the articles published about this, are in reference to the book I have mentioned above → Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, page 1915, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916. So I think, the book (all the articles are in reference to) to be sufficient, and very suitable as a source. --IIIraute (talk) 01:37, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

What "is believed" refers to the question of whether he fought against Germany or not. Given that he was in the Blue Army he "probably" did. But the sourced text you are repeatedly removing doesn't say that he fought against Germany, just that the Blue Army did. If you want to change the text to say that he "probably" fought against Germany be my guest. Still, a lot of reliable sources say exactly that.

Still, explain to me how this dispute over what "is believed" justifies you removing well sourced text about the other stuff? And you keep bringing the book up but the book and the other sources (Der Spiegel, Gazeta etc.) are not in any way disagreeing with each other. They all say the same stuff. The stuff which you are trying to delete because you just happen not to like it. Too bad for you.

And your statement asking for "passage in "Der Spiegel" that states that he was not a German, but a Polish citizen!" appears to be a purposeful way of NOT. GETTING. THE. POINT. Like I said above, of course he was a German citizen, he had to be. I never claimed Der Spiegel said he was a Polish citizen, which would be ridiculous since "Polish citizens" did not exist at the time. Der Spiegel just says... that he was a Pole.

Quit playing around. Volunteer Marek 02:32, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

"Der Spiegel" cites the book → Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, page 1915, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916 [9]. So do all other articles. Henceforth, it is the book we really have to give our attention to. The book states that he was a German citizen with "Polish roots" (...deutscher Staatsbürger ... polnische Wurzeln). What is established, is that he joined the German Imperial Army in 1915, and fought for the German Empire on the Western Front. You did fail to mention that. It is not known under what circumstances he was conscripted for the Blue Army, nor if he ever did raise his arms against the German Empire. Otherwise, please provide sources claiming the contrary. What we do know is that he was born a Prussian/German Empire citizen, an ethnic Pole, who did not feel very bound to his Polish heritage ("Gleichwohl sah sich die Familie auch ihrer polnischen Abstammung verpflichtet. Ludwig Kazmierczak fühlte aber offenbar nicht so"). And after WWI, and the Treaty of Versailles (Posen now being Polish), he left Posen for Berlin, married a German girl, named his boy "Horst" and changed/Germanized his surname to "Kasner", and later also died as a German citizen. He obviously, very much wanted to be German. Why would you seriously claim that he was not → Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies? --IIIraute (talk) 03:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I really don't know what else to say here except to repeat myself - you're just not listening:

1. No one's denying he was a German citizen (after 1915). He couldn't have been a "Polish citizen" because Poland didn't exist at the time, partly because it was partitioned by Prussia - so what? But, as you yourself point out, he was an ethnic Pole and is described as such in the sources. So why are you removing this information?

2. The book and the sources like the Spiegel (which you previously described as "sensationalist press"! WTF?) are not in disagreement. They say the same thing. It's you who's making stuff up.

3. And now you're even agreeing that he was in the Blue Army (the "conscripted" part is your own original research, again). I have no idea "what sources to the contrary" I'm suppose to provide. The sources say he was in in it. What else do you want? And then - sigh, again - why are you removing the text that you admit is reliably sourced?

4. As to his Germanization - sure. It's already in the text. And no one's trying to remove that. YOU are trying to remove other pertinent info. And then you have the chutzpah to accuse OTHERS of "POV pushing"? Please.

At the end of the day it comes down to reliable sources. And these say what the text I added says. You have some kind of an obsession with "pure Germaness" or something so you insist on removing it. Sorry, your own personal hang ups are not a reason to remove reliably sourced text. See WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Volunteer Marek 03:49, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

1. The Province of Posen was a province of Prussia, and as such, part of the German Empire until 1918. Ludwig was born a Prussian/German Empire citizen, who after WWI, and the Treaty of Versailles (Posen now being Polish), left Posen for Berlin, Germany, married a German girl, named his boy "Horst" and changed/Germanized his surname to "Kasner", and later also died as a German citizen.

2. The book (all the articles are based on) states that he was a "German citizen" with "Polish roots" (...deutscher Staatsbürger ... polnische Wurzeln). That's exactly what the article should state. Please see → WP:RS & Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies.

3. I maintain, that it is not known under what circumstances he was conscripted, or if he voluntarily joined the Blue Army, nor if he ever did raise his arms against the German Empire, or ever did join the Blue Army at all. There is only a picture from after the war that depicts him (and his wife who he met in Berlin in the 1920s) in a Blue Army uniform. There are no army records that support that claim. Otherwise, please provide sources claiming the contrary. All sources you are citing use "weasel words".

4. No idea what you are talking about. Please see number 1. & number 2.

5. I recommend we ask/wait for comments from other editors. --IIIraute (talk) 04:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

<-- You're obviously suffering form a bad case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT.

No one's disputing that Ludwig Kazmierczak had German citizenship (after 1915). Will you please stop beating on that poor and irrelevant strawman? What matter is that sources describe him as Polish. Der Spiegel. Gazeta Wyborcza. And more. Another example, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung:

"Ihr Großvater Ludwig Kazmierczak war offenbar ein waschechter Pole - und hat als Soldat der Haller-Armee möglicherweise die Waffen gegen Deutschland erhoben."

Translation: "Her grandfather Ludwig Kazmierczak was obviously a genuine Pole - and as a soldier of the Haller Army (the Blue Army - VM) may have took up arms against Germany."

[10]

You can maintain whatever pleases you most. But that. Doesn't. Matter. Articles on Wikipedia are not written based on idiosyncratic opinions of random editors and the things they "maintain". They are written based on reliable sources. And reliable sources call Kazmierczak a Pole (it's Angela herself who has "Polish roots") and they state he was in the Blue Army. The most respectable German newspapers (not "sensationalist media" as you tried to pretend earlier) have no problem with it, just you. So quit it with the games playing, the IDIDNTHEARTHAT and the WP:IDONTLIKEIT and quit removing well sourced material. Volunteer Marek 16:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry IIIraute, but Marek is, indeed, right. Your behavior is a classic case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and WP:IDONTLIKEIT. The fact that Ludwig was born in the German Empire doesn't make him less of a Pole. Armenians didn't have a state from 1375 until 1918 and every Armenian who was born in that period was not an Armenian? --Երևանցի ^talk 22:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

please see number 4.↓↓ --IIIraute (talk) 23:11, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

1. The newspaper articles you have provided are all based on the same book: Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, page 1915, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916. The book (all the articles are based on) states that he was a "German citizen" with "Polish roots" (...deutscher Staatsbürger ... polnische Wurzeln). That's exactly what the article should state, and not some adulterated teaser version from a newspaper that claims to state the revelations/content of that very same book, while it obviously does not.

2. Per WP:RS → WP:SCHOLARSHIP, the original source, i.e. the book, does supersede the newspaper articles that are merely based/cite from that source. Please, also see → WP:NEWSORG: "News sources often contain both factual content and opinion content. "News reporting" from well-established news outlets is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact (though even the most reputable reporting sometimes contains errors)." All of the articles you have provided have only copied each others content → "Some stories are republished or passed along by multiple news organizations. This is especially true for wire services such as the Associated Press. Each single story must only count as being one source."

3. Regarding: "Her grandfather Ludwig Kazmierczak was obviously a genuine Pole - and as a soldier of the Haller Army may have took up arms against Germany.", please see → WP:NEWSORG: "The reporting of rumors has a limited encyclopedic value, although in some instances verifiable information about rumors may be appropriate. Wikipedia is not the place for passing along gossip and rumors." I still doubt that this information is of relevance for the "Early life" of Angela Merkel.

4. Regarding nationality, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies clearly states: "In most modern-day cases this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen, national or permanent resident, or if notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national or permanent resident when the person became notable." --IIIraute (talk) 23:03, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

You don't need to copy-paste the same thing over and over. The quote from the Manual of Style is about the Opening paragraph (a.k.a. the introduction or the lead). No one here argues that Merkel herself is Polish, nor that her grandfather's ethnicity should be mentioned in the lead, because its irrelevant. It should be mentioned lower in the article. Again, as I already said. Him being a German citizen doesn't make him a German. You still didn't get the point. A German of Polish origin means that he considered himself a German and was a Pole just by blood, which was not the case. Take Ronald Reagan. He is an American of Irish origin. See the difference? His ancestors migrated from Ireland. That is when "origin" comes to play. Merkel's paternal grandfather, Ludwig Kazmierczak, was a Pole born in 1896 in Posen (now Poznań, Poland), at that time part of the German Empire. is accurate enough for the reader to understand that we has a German national (because it clearly states that Poznan was part of Germany at that time of his birth). Here, take Hovhannes Tumanyan. He was born in the Russian Empire and died in Soviet Russia, he never ever lived in independent Armenia, but no one ever calls him Russian. --Երևանցի ^talk 00:03, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

You should pay a bit more attention before making such unqualified statements: "A German of Polish origin means that he considered himself a German and was a Pole just by blood, which was not the case.". What we do know is that he was born a Prussian/German Empire citizen, an ethnic Pole, "who did not feel bound to his Polish heritage". Quote from the book: "Gleichwohl sah sich die Familie auch ihrer polnischen Abstammung verpflichtet. Ludwig Kazmierczak fühlte aber offenbar nicht so".[11] And after WWI, and the Treaty of Versailles (Posen now being Polish), he left Posen for Berlin, Germany, married a German girl, named his boy "Horst" and changed/Germanized his surname to "Kasner", and later also died as a German citizen. He obviously did not want to be a Pole, but considered himself a German.--IIIraute (talk) 00:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

According to Google Translate the sentence says "Nevertheless, the family saw also committed their Polish ancestry. Ludwig Kazmierczak did but apparently not", which is quite different from "not feeling bound to his Polish heritage". Are we discussing your own personal interpretations here? Such as he "obviously did not want to be a Pole"? As I already stated "by origin" is only used to refer to one's descend. He was not a Pole by descend, but by birth and family and culture. And he was a German by citizenship like millions of other Poles, Jews, etc. --Երևանցի ^talk 01:19, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

He had the choice in 1919, Pole or German, didn't he? But he wanted to be German. It's a fact. By birth, he was Prussian/German, a citizen of Prussia/German Empire. The book literally states, that he "did not want to return to his polish roots." See citation below. ↓↓ [12] --IIIraute (talk) 02:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Illraute, you keep linking to the no-preview-google-books-page for the Kornelius book AS IF it proved something. And then offering your own interpretations of it and pretending that just linking to the no-preview-google-books-page justifies your own inventions. Look, we all know the book exists. Its existence is why we are discussing this in the first place. Stop pretending that you are "sourcing" something. You're not. Volunteer Marek 01:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916, literally states that he was a: "German citizen" with "Polish roots" (...deutscher Staatsbürger ... polnische Wurzeln) → page 1915 → [13] & [14]. → "Zum Zeitpunkt der Geburt des Großvaters war Posen Teil des Deutschen Reichs, Ludwig war also formell deutscher Staatsbürger. ... 1919, nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg und mit dem Versailler Vertrag, fiel Posen wieder an Polen zurück. ... viele aus der deutschen Minderheit aus der Region aus — darunter einige, die offenbar nicht zu ihren polnischen Wurzeln zurückwollten. Auch Ludwig Kazmierczak verließ die Heimat, machte sich auf nach Berlin und ließ Teile der Familie zurück.". --IIIraute (talk) 02:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Illraute, your other argument seems to boil down to the assertion that sources such as Der Spiegel or the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung are somehow misrepresenting Kornelius' book, by calling Kazmierczak a Pole. According to your interpretation of Korenlius. Somehow I doubt that is the case. There's misrepresentin' going on here but it's not by the sources. Likewise, you can repeat until you're... blue ... in the face that you don't believe that Kazimerczak was in the Blue Army but your opinion has no weight when the sources say otherwise. Volunteer Marek 00:10, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Please see 1. & 2. The original source (Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, page 1915, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916.) clearly states that he was a "German citizen" with "Polish roots" (...deutscher Staatsbürger ... polnische Wurzeln). Period. --IIIraute (talk) 00:13, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Please see WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. Volunteer Marek 00:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Per WP:RS the article will state the content of the original secondary source, that does supersede the newspaper articles that are merely based/cite from that source. --IIIraute (talk) 00:27, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Per WP:RS the information found in reliable sources like Der Spiegel or the Frankfurter takes precedence over one particular Wikipedia editor's idiosyncratic interpretation of the source. Sorry. Volunteer Marek 01:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916, literally states that he was a: "German citizen" with "Polish roots" (...deutscher Staatsbürger ... polnische Wurzeln) → page 1915 → [15] & [16]. --IIIraute (talk) 02:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Your first link just shows that Kornelius' book exists. Ok. Like I said that's no news. You keep linking to it over and over and pretend that just this bare link supports your original research.

Your second link... well, I don't even know what that's supposed to be. It's a google search for a couple of phrases which you keep repeating over and over here as if they meant something. And it links to... 1) a source I already gave above which says nothing like what you are pretending it says, 2) a completely irrelevant book [17] about nothing to do with this subject what so ever and ... 3) another completely irrelevant book [18] (some stuff about Hollywood?)

At this point it's hard to say anything but: W. T. F.? You are providing links to completely random and completely unrelated sources and at the same time pretending that these somehow support you?

I'm sorry but this has stopped being a serious discussion some time ago. Volunteer Marek 02:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

It is not my problem that you do not have access to the book → WP:OFFLINE. I have properly referenced the cited passages. Go to a library. (Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916, page 1915 → chapter: "Die andere Welt, Ein behütetes Leben in der DDR") --IIIraute (talk) 02:37, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

The book (Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, page 1915, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916), all the articles are based on, literally states that he was a "German citizen" with "Polish roots" → [19]. ⇒ Not once, in the whole book, the term "Pole" is used! ⇐

The Guardian newspaper has properly cited the passages in question:

⇒ "Not only was her grandfather of Polish origin, the chancellor almost was born Angela Kazmierczak. Her grandfather was a Ludwig Kazmierczak, born 1896 in Poznan – then part of the German Reich. The family was proud of its Polish roots. Obviously not grandpa Ludwig who emigrated to Berlin when Poznan became Polish again after the first world war. He married a Berlin woman, and they had a son – Horst Kazmierczak, Angela's father. The family decided to cut their Polish roots in the early 30s. The Kazmierczaks followed a common fashion and Germanised their family name to Kasner." [20] ⇐

Per WP:RS, the original secondary source, i.e. the book, does supersede the newspaper articles that are merely based/cite from that source! I demand, per several WP policies, that this book is used as the main reference! --IIIraute (talk) 00:00, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Changed info according to "Official Biography" ("Angela Merkel: The Authorised Biography by Stefan Kornelius"[21]). Stefan Kornelius is Merkel's official biographer[22].

Please see:Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, page 7, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916 [23][24]. The second reference ("The Guardian" article → [25]) was also written by Merkel's official biographer Stefan Kornelius. --IIIraute (talk) 23:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Look. At this point I don't know what you want me to say. You're engaging in a lot of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT, as noted by several other editors. You have your own ... idiosyncratic interpretation of sources, but that interpretation does not jive with the majority of reliable sources that are actually provided in the article. You keep bringing up Kornelius and pretending that just linking to his book supports your... idiosyncratic POV text, but it doesn't. Actually, come to think of it, linking to a source and claiming that it supports your edits when in fact the source doesn't is called "misrepresenting the source" or less charitably, "lying". So stop it. Volunteer Marek 08:05, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh my, whole paragraph about grandfather and in which armies he may have fought? This is just retarded yellow press style promotion of some Germany vs Poland controversy. At most it would deserve a single sentence of Merkel having some Polish ancestry from paternal grandfathers side and thats it. Whole "in which armies her grandfather served and against whom he may have fought" is clearly just a trivia.--Staberinde (talk) 14:01, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Except it's not yellow journalism nor is there a "German vs Poland controversy"... except of course on Wikipedia. Her grandfather was a Pole who served in a Polish army and might have fought against Germany. It's an interesting and relevant fact, particularly given the political context, the friendly relationship between Merkel and the Polish Prime Minister Tusk, and the general popularity of Merkel in Poland. And it's been extensively covered by the media. The Poles are cool with it. The Germans - and the German press (I linked to several German sources above) - are cool with it. It's just on Wikipedia that some guy's gotta make a huge deal out of it and make it his life mission to deny the info and present his own idiosyncratic version. Par for the course of course. Volunteer Marek 09:38, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Also, Illraute, can you give a more extensive quotation from the book where it says that Kazmierczak "hat polnische Wurzeln"? Like the paragraph it's in. Because every source out there when they talk about who "hat polnische Wurzeln" they are referring to Merkel herself, not Kazmierczak. So let's see it. Volunteer Marek 10:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Its trivia, plain and simple. Interesting? Possibly. Actually relevant to Merkel's early life to extent its given space in article? No way.--Staberinde (talk) 10:38, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree, it is trivia, and of no relevance for the "early life" of Angela Merkel. I did make this point in my first comment. The content is already covered in the Horst Kasner article - that is where it belongs.

The biography, "Angela Merkel: The Authorised Biography by Stefan Kornelius", states the following → "Horsts Vater Ludwig, Angelas Grossvater, wurde 1896 in Posen geboren - allerdings nicht als Ludwig Kasner, sondern als Ludwig Kazmierczak. Wie die Mehrheit der Bevölkerung in der Provinz Posen hatte die Familie Kazmierczak polnische Wurzeln."[26][27] (Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: Die Kanzlerin und ihre Welt, Hoffmann und Campe, 2013, page 7, ISBN-13: 978-3455502916).

Official biographer, Stefan Kornelius, writing for "The Guardian": "Not only was her grandfather of Polish origin, the chancellor almost was born Angela Kazmierczak. Her grandfather was a Ludwig Kazmierczak, born 1896 in Poznan – then part of the German Reich. The family was proud of its Polish roots. Obviously not grandpa Ludwig who emigrated to Berlin when Poznan became Polish again after the first world war. He married a Berlin woman, and they had a son – Horst Kazmierczak, Angela's father. The family decided to cut their Polish roots in the early 30s. The Kazmierczaks followed a common fashion and Germanised their family name to Kasner."[28] --IIIraute (talk) 22:02, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Unexplained change to introduction

I see that the text

"She is the first woman to hold either office."

has again been changed to

"She is the first woman to hold both offices."

without any explanation. In my opinion, the changed version means that no other woman has held both offices before, stongly implying that some unknown woman has held one of the offices before. The original text was the most concise way of expressing that she was the first woman chancellor and the first woman leader of the CDU, which is, in my opinion what the statement is meant to say. I suppose it is possible that one of these statements has a different meaning in some variant of English, but I would like to see third-party confirmation if that is believed to be the case. If no convincing explanation for the change is forthcoming, I will again revert. I suggest compliance with WP:BRD. --Boson (talk) 23:42, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

I concur with Boson. That said, as I haven't edited the article myself, I will just warn here that the nascent edit war is not a solution. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:32, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Support for Iraq War 2003

Merkel was in support of the Iraq war und wanted to join the USA in case she was elected in the year 2002. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.240.124.39 (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Proper English, family history and name change to Kasner

Looking at the archives of this page, past discussions seem to support inclusion of her family history, with only one person objecting for unconvincing reasons. Indeed, articles on American politicians such as Obama include vast information on their family (there is even an entire article devoted to the subject: Family of Barack Obama). The name change to Kasner from the original Polish name in 1930 seems particularly relevant. Also, I see no consensus not to use proper English grammar in the article. Elizabeth Cumberbatch (talk) 23:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Elizabeth Cumberbatch's version of history seems more than a little disingenuous. Please see Staberinde's → [29] or Sandstein's → [30] edits, for example. The content belongs in the article about her father, Horst Kasner.

I would suggest following the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted until a consensus is reached on the talk page. --IIIraute (talk) 00:03, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Exactly, so why did you removed certain text, if the discussion still continues?--Mishae (talk) 01:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle → "which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted"; i.e. "leave the article in the condition it was in before the Bold edit was made" (often called the status quo ante). --IIIraute (talk) 02:02, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

The consensus is to include the material, so kindly stop removing sourced material. You do not have a veto on whether to use correct English grammar or on whether to include sourced and relevant information that sources have reported widely on. Leaving out that the family changed their name to Kasner in 1930 is nothing but historical revisionism. That this essential part of her family history only belongs "in the article about her father" is just wrong. Elizabeth Cumberbatch (talk) 06:10, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Would you please be so kind to refer to the exact passage of this consensus? --IIIraute (talk) 06:14, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

You do not own or have a personal veto in regard to this page, so kindly stop being disruptive. You know very well that your unilateral actions were opposed by other users in the past as well. Elizabeth Cumberbatch (talk) 06:16, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Please show the consensus you are referring to - I hope you do not mean our Eastern European mailing list friends, aka Volunteer Marek , for example - do you?

If you'd care to read the Horst Kasner article, for example - or the talk archive → [31] - you would see that the story regarding her grandfather is a bit more complex. --IIIraute (talk) 06:32, 5 March 2014 (UTC)06:21, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Illraute, everyone who's come to this article and tried to deal with this issue has disagreed with you. You're removing sourced text, edit warring, and engaging in disruptive behavior. The consensus is clearly against you, as are Wikipedia policies. Please refrain from further reverting and edit warring.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:39, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Please refer to this consensus - who are the editors you are talking about? Newly created accounts that have only edited the Angela Merkel articel so far, like Elizabeth Cumberbatch → [32]? Obviously far to experienced to be a "new" editor ... and a minute later you turn up?! Quite early London time when you did your first Merkel edit today, Elizabeth - [33] - wasn't it? Other editors do not agree - please see Staberinde's → [34] or Sandstein's → [35] edits, for example. You know exactly that the story regarding her grandfather is more complex. And you, Recruit Marek should be banned from editing Germany related topics! --IIIraute (talk) 06:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Neither Sandstein's nor Staberinde's edits - which restore the info - support your reverts - which are removing it. That info was removed recently by an anonymous IP [36]. You are now edit warring to keep that info removed. Additionally, I don't see neither Sandstein nor Staberinde discussing the issue on talk.

In addition to Elizabeth above, other users have likewise disagreed with you, reverted you, and described your behavior on this article as disruptive. For example: [37] Sorry IIIraute, but Marek is, indeed, right. Your behavior is a classic case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:04, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Obviously far to experienced to be a "new" editor ... and a minute later you turn up?! - if you are trying to imply that User:Elizabeth_Cumberbatch is a sock puppet (of myself or anyone else) then put up or shut up. Present evidence, file an SPI report whatever. Or at the very least have the courage to make that kind of accusation explicitly. If not, then please refrain from making such baseless accusations in the future.

Additionally, I would appreciate it if you referred to me - if refer you must - by my user name, Volunteer Marek. "VM" is sufficient. Please don't try to "parody" it in some attempt to insult me. And this talk page is not the place to air personal opinions about who should be banned, is it? There's plenty of other pages for that but somehow no matter how many spurious and bad faithed reports have been filed, no banning of myself from German related topics has taken place. Because there is no reason for such action.Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:09, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Really, and what's about Staberinde's comment: "This is just retarded yellow press style promotion of some Germany vs Poland controversy. At most it would deserve a single sentence of Merkel having some Polish ancestry from paternal grandfathers side and thats it. Whole "in which armies her grandfather served and against whom he may have fought" is clearly just a trivia." here & "Its trivia, plain and simple. Interesting? Possibly. Actually relevant to Merkel's early life to extent its given spacein article? No way." [38] Later on Staberinde removed your POV pushing → here. --IIIraute (talk) 04:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring & POV pushing

Regarding the POV pushing:

Angela Merkel: The Authorized Biography: "Horst’s father Ludwig, Angela’s grandfather, was born in Posen in 1896 – although not as Ludwig Kasner, but Ludwig Kazmierczak. Like most inhabitants of the province of Posen, the Kazmierczaks had Polish roots, and since the second partition of Poland, the city and surrounding region had seen several boundary changes and various different rulers. At the time of Ludwig Kazmierczak’s birth, Posen was part of the German Empire, so Merkel’s grandfather was officially a German citizen. The family nonetheless had remained faithful to its Polish origins, although Ludwig clearly didn’t share those sentiments. As a result he made a decision that was to have far-reaching consequences. In 1919, after the First World War and the Treaty of Versailles, Posen once again became part of Poland. In the years that followed, much of the German minority emigrated from the region – including those who didn’t want to return to Poland. Ludwig Kazmierczak was one of those who left his native land and part of his family behind and set off for Berlin, where he met his future wife Margarethe. Their son Horst was born in 1926. But it wasn’t until 1930 that Ludwig Kazmierczak decided to adopt the German version of his surname and began calling himself Kasner."

→Stefan Kornelius, Angela Merkel: The Authorized Biography, Alma Books Ltd, Richmond, 2013, page 14, ISBN-13: 978-1846883071, here

Fact: Ludwig Kazmierczak was a German citizen born in Posen, German Empire in 1896. (In 1793, Posen came under the control of Prussia. With Prussia, the province became part of the united German Empire in 1871.)

Fact: Ludwig Kazmierczak officially changed his name to "Ludwig Kasner" - meaning - his name is "Ludwig Kasner", and that is how the article should refer to him.

The Guardian: "Not only was her grandfather of Polish origin, the chancellor almost was born Angela Kazmierczak. Her grandfather was a Ludwig Kazmierczak, born 1896 in Poznan – then part of the German Reich. The family was proud of its Polish roots. Obviously not grandpa Ludwig who emigrated to Berlin when Poznan became Polish again after the first world war. He married a Berlin woman, and they had a son – Horst Kazmierczak, Angela's father. The family decided to cut their Polish roots in the early 30s. The Kazmierczaks followed a common fashion and Germanised their family name to Kasner." see

Fact: "Ludwig Kazmierczak was one of those who left his native land and part of his family behind and set off for Berlin, where he met his future wife Margarethe." (Angela Merkel: The Authorized Biography, p. 14) He did not take his "German-born fiancée Margarethe with him to Poznan ... to later settle in Berlin".

Another fact, Volunteer Marek rather prefers to stifle, because it does not fit his glorious "grandpa did fight for the Poles only" propaganda:

n-tv: "Ludwig was mobilised into the German army in 1915 and fought for the German Empire in France, where in 1918, he was taken prisoner of war or deserted" see

Deutsche Welle: "According to the largest Polish daily "Gazeta Wyborcza," her grandfather Ludwig Kazmierczak was Polish and is believed to have fought against the Germans as a Polish soldier in 1918." see

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: "...during the First World War, [this army] was formed under French command, from German POW's of Polish origin, and at least some of their units, have fought in 1918 ... experts, like the Polish historian Wolodzimierz Boriodziej did confirm to this newspaper, that it is not ruled out that Kazmierczak could have raised his arms against Germany." see

Volunteer Marek, i.e Elizabeth Cumberbatch claim to have editor consensus on their side, yet - as evident from the talk-archive discussion - such a consensus was never achieved.

Since there was no consensus for the changes made to the version that was stable for the last four months (and for much longer before VM's edit warring four months ago), Elizabeth Cumberbatch and Volunteer Marek have violated several WP policies with their reverts, especially by not following the previously suggested Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted; i.e. "leave the article in the condition it was in before the Bold edit was made" (often called the status quo ante). --IIIraute (talk) 05:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

There is not a chance in hell that I'm replying to this barrage of personal attacks, falsehoods, unfounded accusations, attempts at outing and intimidation and bad faith. Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:50, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

I have removed the passages you were worrying about - I do not know why you want this content removed so much - but see it as a token of goodwill. --IIIraute (talk) 05:28, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

I've seen Marek interrupting, edit warring and pushing his POV more than a dozen times now. It might be about time for a little break. -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 13:40, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Incredible. Volunteer Marek just goes on POV pushing with revert warring against consensus and reason. IIIraute explained perfectly why the content is inappropriate.--walkee^talkee 10:39, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Agree with Staberinde's assessment of the situation. Also IIIRaute's detailed explanation helps further. No need to enter such irrelevant trivia, which also seems controversial. Lokalkosmopolit (talk) 22:37, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

PS. Just a few hours after my comment here, Volunteer Marek proceeded to revert my changes to an article he had never edited before. Tell me, Marek, is it your habit to perform 'revenge' edits against everyone who happens to disagree with you?Lokalkosmopolit (talk) 11:50, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Proper English, family history and name change to Kasner

Looking at the archives of this page, past discussions seem to support inclusion of her family history, with only one person objecting for unconvincing reasons. Indeed, articles on American politicians such as Obama include vast information on their family (there is even an entire article devoted to the subject: Family of Barack Obama). The name change to Kasner from the original Polish name in 1930 seems particularly relevant. Also, I see no consensus not to use proper English grammar in the article. Elizabeth Cumberbatch (talk) 23:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Elizabeth Cumberbatch's version of history seems more than a little disingenuous. Please see Staberinde's → [39] or Sandstein's → [40] edits, for example. The content belongs in the article about her father, Horst Kasner.

I would suggest following the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted until a consensus is reached on the talk page. --IIIraute (talk) 00:03, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Exactly, so why did you removed certain text, if the discussion still continues?--Mishae (talk) 01:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle → "which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted"; i.e. "leave the article in the condition it was in before the Bold edit was made" (often called the status quo ante). --IIIraute (talk) 02:02, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

The consensus is to include the material, so kindly stop removing sourced material. You do not have a veto on whether to use correct English grammar or on whether to include sourced and relevant information that sources have reported widely on. Leaving out that the family changed their name to Kasner in 1930 is nothing but historical revisionism. That this essential part of her family history only belongs "in the article about her father" is just wrong. Elizabeth Cumberbatch (talk) 06:10, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Would you please be so kind to refer to the exact passage of this consensus? --IIIraute (talk) 06:14, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

You do not own or have a personal veto in regard to this page, so kindly stop being disruptive. You know very well that your unilateral actions were opposed by other users in the past as well. Elizabeth Cumberbatch (talk) 06:16, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Please show the consensus you are referring to - I hope you do not mean our Eastern European mailing list friends, aka Volunteer Marek , for example - do you?

If you'd care to read the Horst Kasner article, for example - or the talk archive → [41] - you would see that the story regarding her grandfather is a bit more complex. --IIIraute (talk) 06:32, 5 March 2014 (UTC)06:21, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Illraute, everyone who's come to this article and tried to deal with this issue has disagreed with you. You're removing sourced text, edit warring, and engaging in disruptive behavior. The consensus is clearly against you, as are Wikipedia policies. Please refrain from further reverting and edit warring.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:39, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Please refer to this consensus - who are the editors you are talking about? Newly created accounts that have only edited the Angela Merkel articel so far, like Elizabeth Cumberbatch → [42]? Obviously far to experienced to be a "new" editor ... and a minute later you turn up?! Quite early London time when you did your first Merkel edit today, Elizabeth - [43] - wasn't it? Other editors do not agree - please see Staberinde's → [44] or Sandstein's → [45] edits, for example. You know exactly that the story regarding her grandfather is more complex. And you, Recruit Marek should be banned from editing Germany related topics! --IIIraute (talk) 06:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Neither Sandstein's nor Staberinde's edits - which restore the info - support your reverts - which are removing it. That info was removed recently by an anonymous IP [46]. You are now edit warring to keep that info removed. Additionally, I don't see neither Sandstein nor Staberinde discussing the issue on talk.

In addition to Elizabeth above, other users have likewise disagreed with you, reverted you, and described your behavior on this article as disruptive. For example: [47] Sorry IIIraute, but Marek is, indeed, right. Your behavior is a classic case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:04, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Obviously far to experienced to be a "new" editor ... and a minute later you turn up?! - if you are trying to imply that User:Elizabeth_Cumberbatch is a sock puppet (of myself or anyone else) then put up or shut up. Present evidence, file an SPI report whatever. Or at the very least have the courage to make that kind of accusation explicitly. If not, then please refrain from making such baseless accusations in the future.

Additionally, I would appreciate it if you referred to me - if refer you must - by my user name, Volunteer Marek. "VM" is sufficient. Please don't try to "parody" it in some attempt to insult me. And this talk page is not the place to air personal opinions about who should be banned, is it? There's plenty of other pages for that but somehow no matter how many spurious and bad faithed reports have been filed, no banning of myself from German related topics has taken place. Because there is no reason for such action.Volunteer Marek (talk) 07:09, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Really, and what's about Staberinde's comment: "This is just retarded yellow press style promotion of some Germany vs Poland controversy. At most it would deserve a single sentence of Merkel having some Polish ancestry from paternal grandfathers side and thats it. Whole "in which armies her grandfather served and against whom he may have fought" is clearly just a trivia." here & "Its trivia, plain and simple. Interesting? Possibly. Actually relevant to Merkel's early life to extent its given spacein article? No way." [48] Later on Staberinde removed your POV pushing → here. --IIIraute (talk) 04:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring & POV pushing

Regarding the POV pushing: