This is an archive of past discussions about Berlin Wall. 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.
The DDR's claim was that the building of the wall was not to keep people from leaving East Berlin. However ridiculous this claim may be, it should be acknowledged for the sake of NPOV. --user:Daniel C. Boyer
it's true...camel cigarette billboards were up before the first big mac was sold on the other side...the bananas were flying (mick , who was there...)Is this appropriate for smokers who are going to get Camels, big macs, and/or flying bananas?Please add if you agree w/me[tiggerhop]
Surely it wasn't built entirely on August 13th? What happened that day -- checkpoints activated? or what? Catherinei dont understand![tiggerhop]
They ran barbed wire across all access points and put tanks and infantry on the streets. While the concrete wall and permanent guard posts were lacking the physical barrier and intent were present from that day.
1955 is less insane than 1855 but still wrong, being 6 years before the construction of the wall... Morwen 18:40, 3 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I tend to agree with the prevailing view in this article (that the wall was built to prevent people going from east to west), however some of these sentences are too POV, like "It was clear from the beginning that this justification served as a cover for the fact that the citizens of East Germany had to be prevented from entering West Berlin and thereby West Germany (East Germany did not completely control traffic between West Berlin and the rest of West Germany)." I really don't have to be told it's clear one side is correct or another is, I think a reasonable person can just be handed the facts and interpret them themselves, we don't need interpretation in Wikipedia as well. I would tend to interpret it as said, but it doesn't belong.
On another point, most analysis I've seen of the migration, be it non-communist left or US intelligence analysis noted that the majority of people coming over were educated professionals and that this was the real problem. East Germany could well afford to have 2.5 million people leave the country from 1949 to 1961, East Germany could not afford that number when they were mostly professionals - electricians, doctors, scientists and the like. This is an important point and was not mentioned in the article, I added it. Nakosomo 05:06, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
This part (under the "Aftermath and implications" section of "The Fall" doesn't seem to be related to the article: "In 1990 the U.S. Congress failed to pass the defense budget forcing many government defense contracting companies to lay off thousands of workers." Does anyone know what this means? —This unsigned comment was added by 130.215.168.251 (talk • contribs) 19 March 2006.
There is a section repeated from the Secondary Response section in the main title section. While the Berlin Wall was important as a symbol, the passage in the first section should be pared down or removed, as it isn't directly revelant to specifically what the wall was.---
David C: June 12, 2007:
There is a sentence that is worded awkwardly, and misleads the reader to believe the Beer Hall Putsch was also in 1938, along with Kristallnacht.
The original is currently:
However, November 9 is also the anniversary of the Beer Hall Putsch and the infamous Kristallnacht pogroms of 1938 and, therefore, October 3 was chosen instead.
"After a misunderstanding, Günter Schabowski announced in a press conference..." .....Please give details on what the misunderstanding was! I really am intrigued. Kingturtle03:59, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
My memories of the 9.11.1989 are as follows. The anouncement of Günter Schabowski (east german politician) that all travel restrictions for citizens of the DDR are lifted was made on a press conference. I heard it on the radio, and it sounded as even the news reader could not believe it. It would be great to have an audio sample of these radio news here. It was a Thursday evening, during the night Berliners tested the announcement and were able to get intot the west. Border guards were confused I was told, they did not know about the new policies, but they were afraid to oppose the masses of people who demanded to cross the border into West Berlin. On my way to work on Friday I could see a number of Trabant cars milling around in West Berlin, people from East Berlin coming over for a visit to the west. Saturday was complete chaos, Hundredthousands of citizens from East Berlin came for various reasons... Shopping, seeing family members... in the street where I lived I met somebody who was looking for the place he used to work before 1961, a roofer workshop, it was highly emotional.
For propaganda reasons visitors from the east could claim 20 DMark (west money) every time they were able to visit the west. Of course this was soon abolished after 1989. Before it was mostly pensioners with family ties to the west who were allowed to travel to West Berlin. (By the way, in East Germany, the official spelling for the west of the city was Westberlin. And East Berlin was 'Berlin, Hauptstadt der DDR'.) This payment was called 'Begrüßungsgeld' or 'welcome money'. It was paid by the banks on behalf of the government and you had to show your DDR passport or ID card as proof of identity I think. On the way to do my Saturday shopping I came past an enormous queue outside of a bank near my flat, east german visitors claiming their 'Begrüßungsgeld'. (This was the Berliner Bank at Hallesches Tor, I lived in Obentrautstrasse, and usually did my shopping in the upstairs supermarket in the 'Hertie am Halleschen Ufer'. This shop also was packed with people, trying to buy something from the 20DM they had.
I could probably go on and on with my personal memories, and I have to write them down some time. I am always very moved thinking back to these days in Berlin.
In theory the GDR had elections, a parliament and opposition parties. In practice the central commitee of the SED (Itself theoretically a merger of the Social democrat party with the smaller communist party but in fact almost totally dominated by Communists) enjoyed virtually total control and were accountable only to their Soviet masters. It was all set up mainly for propaganda reasons but also as a pretence at honouring agreements made with the Western allies at the end of WW2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.40.129.129 (talk) 10:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I was told that there was an even larger wall on the whole thousand-kilometer border between the two Germanies. Should there be a mention of it here, or even a page for that ?
Yes. Fences, watchtowers and minefields.
These days that area is a nature refuge, because humans hardly interfered there for 50 years. Except for some towns directly at the border, the whole border regions were underdeveloped too
There should be a page for that, if it doesnt exist yet. The border was strongly guarded between the BRD (Federal Republic of Germany) and the DDR (German Democratic Republic).
"Give me back my wall"
Given the recent poll data we are reporting on people now wishing we again had two Germany's instead of one, could someone find & photograph one of those "Geben Sie mir zurück mein Mauer" T-shirts ("Give me back my wall", I may not have the German quite right) which I remember seeing circa 1996? It would make a good illustration next to that passage. "I love Germany so much, I'm glad there are two of them" -- Francois Mauriac -- Jmabel 20:34, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
That was a temporary sentiment. You don't see such signs now, therefore it's hard to find a photo. Anorak2
There's a woman in Sweden who is, or so she claims, married to the Berlin Wall ("sexiest and best wall ever!"). Should this get a mention? DS 18:11, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Indeed it should, as it shows how terribly great an effect the Berlin Wall had in global issues.
Check out the website. The political dynamic of the wall has nothing to do with this woman's obsession. She is clearly very disturbed and has an obsession with prefabricated walls, fences, etc., which are of a certain shape and dimensions. Maybe it's a hoax, but if not-- man, that's one weird chick. ---TexxasFinn
Anniversary Date?
"However, because November 9 is also the anniversary of the infamous Kristallnacht pogroms of October 3, 1938 was chosen instead"
This sentence does not make grammatical sense but I cannot change it because I don't know what it means. --Feitclub 00:52, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
I've reworded to fix this. The problem was that the underlying wikitext was "because... [of] the infamous [[Kristallnacht]] pogroms of [[1938]], [[October 3]] was chosen instead." The wiki tried to get too smart and reinterpreted "[[1938]], [[October 3]]", which it thought was a single date, into your preferred date style. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:53, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
Understood, now. Thanks. --Feitclub 22:10, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
Fall of the Wall
While it might not have enough importance to be mentioned, I personally think that there should be something about the famous photo showing West Berliners destroying the Wall, [1]. Also, if the person shown there were to be identified, it could also help a lot. Kaiser Matias 19:45 13 August 2005 (UTC)
There's extensive television coverage about these events. In brief: While everywhere else along the wall and in Berlin generally people were peaceful and euphoric during those November days, the Brandenburg gate attracted a crowd of aggressive youths (some drunk) from the west who were trying to break a hole into the wall. They partly succeeded, but finally were driven away by a joint effort of East German border guards using water hoses, and the West Berlin police. It's not quite clear who these people were, but judging from the coverage they were neither left wing nor right wing, even though they sang the national anthem and generally argued against the GDR. These circumstances are rarely told whenever the footage is shown. Anorak212:47, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Museum reconstructing section of wall
The following text contains a stale external link which I removed from the article. It would be good to find an alternative which still works.
Fifteen years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a private museum is rebuilding a 200-meter section close to Checkpoint Charlie. [2]
Done, and story updated. It was only a temporary installation. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:54, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
The 50ish km is the stretch separating East Berlin from West Berlin, the 150ish km is the entire border around West Berlin. You see both figures quoted. Anorak212:49, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Mao's idea?
According to "Mao, the untold story" by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday it was Mao Zedong who suggested to Ulbricht that building a wall would be a good idea. Maybe this should be mentioned, I don't know if this is stated in any other source. 8472 09:15, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Did the Berlin Wall lower the nearby land value?
I just want to ask if anyone knows whether the Berlin Wall lowered the nearby land value. I suppose the answer is yes, but I would like more information before editing the article about this.--Jusjih04:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I just learned from a friend in Berlin that some of East Berlin's most luxurious apartments were actually quite close to the wall. This is because such apartments were reserved for high government officials who weren't considered flight risks. --Jfruh13:21, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Not in general, I don't think so. While the wall indirectly caused wasteland in the inner city (e.g. near Potsdamer Platz), it also cut through some highly populated areas, where housing prices were not particularly lower than in comparable parts of the city further away from the wall. This applies to West Berlin of course. East Berlin had no free real estate market anyway. Anorak212:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Apparently some West Berliners felt uncomfortable living too close to the wall and some neighbourhoods there ended up being mostly inhabited by immigrant communities (mainly from Turkey and Greece) availing of the relatively cheap (at the time) housing. According to what I was told by a Turkish guy living there anyway. 213.40.129.129 (talk) 10:25, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I am unsure of this, but before the Berlin Wall collapsed functionally (not structually other than willful damage to it), there were anti-government protests in East Germany without bloody ends, unlike the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 with a very bloody end. I am unsure of any connections.--Jusjih08:06, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm not aware of any scholary work on that. But my personal impression (as a West German) is that the peacefulness of the events of autumn 1989 was very much due to the aftershock of Tiananmen. You could sense that the East German border guards/soldiers/military desperately wanted to avoid another Tiananmen on East German soil. I don't think that Tiananmen sparked the events that led to the fall of the Wall - but it was instrumental in the protests being succesful.--195.128.250.12223:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
I actually remember a news report covering the 40th Anniversary of East Germany's existance, in which Erich Honecker himself threatened to treat any pro-Democracy demonstrators "like China." Luckily, that never happened. ----DanTD (talk) 20:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
2/3 of the articles are the same. Either one of them needs some info trimmed out of it or they should simply be merged. Vicarious21:12, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
If any article should have the material torn out of it it should be the GDR border article. The Berlin Wall is a symbol of the separation of East/West Germany and deserves its own lengthy article. Thecolemanation07:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
This is much more than a mere "housekeeping" suggestion. Most English speakers would never think of trying to find information about the Berlin wall under "GDR" and "border". If any article should be altered or removed, it should be the "GDR border" one.
the Berlin Wall and the "German Border system" are not the same thing, and while they have many things in common, the border system between East and West Germany (as opposed to East and West Berlin) has its own history (the physical barriers were created in 1954 for a start - the article as it stands is wrong). The German Wikipedia has seperate articles (de:Innerdeutsche Grenze, de:Berliner_Mauer). Ianb22:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Ianb. The Berlin Wall was merely one part of the GDR border system. It was certainly by far the most famous part, but it was very different from the rest of the border system in terms of its construction, operations and history. The border system article mentions the Berlin Wall in passing and this article mentions the border system in passing; I don't think there's any significant overlap between the two. Vicarious' assertion that "2/3 of the articles are the same" (which s/he presents without providing any examples of similarity) is simply wrong, as even a cursory comparison of the two articles shows. -- ChrisO00:52, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Against merge. These are different things, which both deserve an article. Since they are closely related, the Berlin wall being a part of the GDR border system, it would be good to stress this connection though. LARS13:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Against merge. As someone new to this topic I have found the two articles relatively independent and, in my view, the best way to present the information. As already discussed the two "barriers" have quite different histories and both deserve their own pages. I do think, however, that the GDR border article needs to be updated with facts stated in this article. Feenix(talk • email)14:49, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi everybody! I shortened and refined the lines: "East German residents wishing to leave the GDR, even merely for a vacation on socialist territory, often faced tough controls and long waits for exit visas. Meanwhile, residents of other East European Communist nations flocked to the GDR for trade and leisure when possible, as it was the most prosperous country of the Soviet bloc."
In this context the second part of the statement lacks meaningful information and suggest that other Eastern block residents had easier passage through the Polish-GDR, Czechoslovak-GDR borders. In fact the harsh contol was applied on all ordenary travellers regardless country origin.
The judment on GDR as being the most prosperious country of the Soviet block raises questions. It either needs some objective figures or it should be deleted. Generaly I beleive "prosperity" is not an appropriate term to use to describe any of the former Eastern block countries. Perhaps "relatively prosperious" would be more accurate, but this above mentioned context can live without it.--Kukorelli23:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
removed images
I have removed two images. I removed Image: Conrad Schumann.jpg because it has no source information and no reasonable claim to fair use. It also didn't make a significant addition to this article. I removed Image:Stamp-ctc-fall-of-the-berlin-wall.jpg because it was uploaded for the purpose of identification (of the stamp) and is not fair use for any other purpose, see its page for more details. Vicarious03:58, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree your actions. Fair use and copyright infringement in the United States do not have a clear boundary. For Conrad Schumann escaping, posting it at his article should be good enough. The US stamp image can be seen elsewhere. We cannot claim too many fair uses, or the use will be unfair and infringing. German Wikipedia does not allow images claimed as fair use.--Jusjih14:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Checkpoints Alpha and Bravo. By the way, it's spelt Charlie...
Checkpoint Alpha was at Helmstedt/Marienborn on the West German/East German border. Checkpoint Bravo was at Dreilinden on the western outskirts of Berlin where the autobahn led to the south and west.
There were indeed more checkpoints along the inner city border in Berlin. Foreigners could use either Checkpoint Charlie or enter and exit through the railway station at Friedrichtstrasse inside East Berlin. Friedrichstrasse station was a heavily fortified station inside East Berlin which could only be entered by going through passport control. There were armed border guards sitting on seats up in the roof rafters, and every international train passing through from east to west, or vica versa, was thoroughly searched. A row of armed border guards with dogs lined along the platform for every incoming train. The stretch of railway track from this station to beyond the wall was heavily fortified and watched by border guards in watchtowers.
The different categories of Germans were allowed to use some other checkpoints. Heinrich Heine Strasse and Bornholmer Strasse spring to mind. David Tombe (talk) 10:52, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
GDR Propaganda site with images
Interesting site, with some great images that would be fantastic in this article - can't figure out the copyright status though. Any takers? [3]Kaisershatner14:42, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Emigration
It was still possible to leave East Germany after the construction of the Wall. I think this should be mentioned somewhere in the article because the only clue to this was in the opening paragraph (which was misleading and I corrected) and later when it states that "a few" people who were too old to work were allowed through. It sounds like some old codgers hobbled over to the Wall and the guards took pity and let them through... whereas in reality there was an official process. In fact, in order to comply with United Nations directives on freedom of movement, the GDR had an official application form for leaving the country. This was of course just for show because the answer was almost always 'Nein', unless they wanted you to go - like if you were an unproductive member of society: retired or just too much trouble. I don't have the official figures at hand but I know that 10s of 1000s left annualy. In 1983 11,000 left and that was the lowest amount in any given year, with highs of around 40,000.
Then there are also the political prisoners that were sold by the East to the West. 'Compensation' was the communist spin of the day. West Germany took prisoners off their hands, set them free and made them into West Germans. There was an old joke in the East that if the communists were running out of money there would be a whole load of arrests. I actually met someone who got himself deliberately arrested in order to be sent to the West, successfully.
As it stands the article gives the impression that absolutely no one could cross into the West at all but in fact 100s of 1000s did so. It was the illegal emigration that was a problem - not the government sanctioned emigration. Per189220:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Severe vandalism here may require temporary protection
Severe vandalism has happened here. The article may require temporary protection. Any available administrator should consider this while I cannot do so (not an admin here).--Jusjih14:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I remember a video image of a bicyclist riding across the top of the wall during news coverage of the event; I think the American TV network NBC eventually used it as part of the title in their special reports at the time. It wouldn't necessarily make the article better if someone found and added a picture of this, but it is a motif that has stuck in my memory, and perhaps others would appreciate seeing it as well. B7T23:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Illegal emigration is the wrong choice of words
Describing the barrier as having "effectively decreased illegal emigration" in the first paragraph is misleading and perhaps a poor choice of words. The word emigration alone would suffice in my opinion. Illegal emigration is wrong. Even it were GDR policy to limit travel to western countries, the people in the GDR were mostly born with a common German citizenship and the GDR right to limit their travel in the country of their was never recognized by most countries in the world.
"Illegal emigration" is too reminiscint of "illegal immigration", an issue with a completely different legal and social background in common use. I would suggest it be changed to simply "emigration" (without illegal) or something that better explains the situation, such as "effectively decreased emigration, which was restricted by the East German regime.--62.245.143.3408:11, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
In the entry "Escape attempts" there was the following line: "During the Wall's existence there were around 5,000 successful escapes into West Berlin (a form of illegal immigration)." First of all, the Berlin Wall was mean't to keep people in, and being in mean't being a communist slave. Second, while the Wall was in operation, the words "illegal immigrant" were never used to describe anyone escaping from East Berlin; these people were shot on sight by the guards determined that no one leave. They were escaping a totalitarian regime. And yes, as a result of that bit of deliberate mis-information I removed the offending line. Carajou06:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
photo
{{editprotected}}
Please add date 1962 to caption of Peter Fechter photo. Also please add statement of why page is protected. 80.229.160.15019:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I've added 1962 to the photo's caption, hopefully as you wanted it to appear. I also added a notice about why the page has been protected--the article was semi-protected by ChrisO (talk·contribs) due to recent vandalism from anonymous editors. To avoid having to request that changes be made to sprotected articles in the future, you may want to consider registering for an account. The article likely won't be protected for more than a day or two, but feel free to ask if you need to implement any other changes. Sorry about the inconvenience! AmiDaniel (Talk) 01:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Portion of Wall at Westminster College
The section Portion of Wall at Westminster College seems to me to be rather long proportional to its importance, and a bit magazine-ish. Does anyone have a problem with the idea of editing this down to the basics? We can move the bulk of this to the article on the college, if it is not already there. - Jmabel | Talk20:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
--Kukorelli15:41, 1 August 2006 (UTC)Minor change: from "While East Germany became the richest" to "While East Germany became —one of— the richest", I think it is more objective.
I agree with Jambel. I think that the Westminster College section is completely out of place in this article and ALL of it should be moved to the main Westminster College article. It is over long and of little interest to anyone except former students of the college and perhaps distant relations of Winston Churchill.
Intro graf should explain the topic
The introductory paragraph should quickly explain what the subject matter is, not dive into social characteristics or historic gobbeldygook.
"The Berlin Wall was a combination of fence and concrete barrier surrounding the city of Berlin during the Cold War. Built in ... by the government of East Germany, which surrounded Berlin, it was intended to stop East Germans from fleeing the communist country by way of the city. It was dismantled in ... [etc]"
The Good Article review on this article has ended, with a 5 to 1 vote to delist. Primarily references were the concern, as much of the article doesn't appear to explicitly be referenced. I'll give you this, it does seem like some more inline citations have been added, but it doesn't appear to of been an amazingly substantial change. However, if i'm wrong about this and you feel strongly enough about it, feel free to list the article up for review again. Dispute archived at Wikipedia:Good articles/Disputes/Archive 8. Homestarmy20:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Added a citation
I've added a wise citation by mr.Suvorov, summarising the political importance and meaning of this construction. The original is:
13 августа 1961 года Берлин был разрезан пополам бетонной стеной. Назначение стены: удержать жителей Восточной социалистической Германии от бегства в нормальный мир.
Стена постоянно совершенствовалась и укреплялась, превращаясь из стены в систему непреодолимых инженерных заграждений с ловушками, сложнейшей системой сигнализации, с бетонными огневыми точками, наблюдательными вышками, противотанковыми тетраэдрами и ежами, с хитроумными автоматами-самострелами, которые убивали беглецов даже без участия пограничников.
Но чем больше труда, изобретательности, денег, бетона и стали коммунисты вкладывали в дальнейшее развитие стены, тем яснее становилось: удержать людей в коммунистическом обществе можно только неприступными заграждениями, колючей проволокой, собаками, стрельбой в спину. Стена означала: система, которую построили коммунисты, не привлекает никого. Она отталкивает - http://militera.lib.ru/research/suvorov7/07.html Суворов, Виктор Тень победы.Constanz - Talk11:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Mines
In the main text, it's stated that the "no man's land" was mined and booby-trapped. But I don't recall reports of people getting blown up during the 1989 celebrations. So when were they de-mined? When one of the subsequent walls was constructed? Or did people avoid the areas they knew to be mined and de-mining happened afterwards? Calbaer20:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
There were no mines nor auto-triggered guns at any part of the Berlin Wall, as opposed to the border between East and West Germany. That part of the description is just wrong. Anorak213:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
The museum at Checkpoint Charlie features an automaic spring gun they claim is from the wall, are they lying?
It probably is from the border between East and West Germany. Unless they claim it's from the Berlin Wall proper, they're not lying. Anorak210:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I remember reading somewhere that some of the automatic spring guns were removed at one stage as part of an agreement with West Germany. (In return the FRG government acted as garantor for loans made by the world bank to East Germany) Not sure if this was in Berlin or elsewhere ? 213.40.129.129 (talk) 10:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
It was at the border between East and West Germany, the agreement about their removal was in 1983. There were never any in Berlin they could have made an agreement about. Anorak2 (talk) 20:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Quote from Suvorov
The quote from Suvorov is overtly POV, calling the anti-communist block "the normal world" etc.. It adds nothing and should be removed. --194.145.161.22617:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
"The Wall was chipped away at by a euphoric public and souvenir hunters over the next several weeks, it was later removed using industrial equipment and its so called "fall" prepared the way for Nationalist tendencies which gained acendency in East Germany towards the end of 1989 following extravagant promises of "blooming landscapes" and "economic wonders" the East German voters were convinced of the need for German reunification, which was formally concluded on October 3, 1990."
Is this a real sentence? It needs serious revision.
Did this wall prevent travel from East Berlin to West Berlin or did it promote it? Could people travel from East Berlin to West Berlin before this wall was built. I can't understand if its building was to cut off travel or to increase it. And did they destroy it to be able to tralvel? 75.75.115.15101:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)Taroga
The wall prevented travel, and mor importantly emigration, from East Germany and East Berlin to West Germany and West Berlin. (How can a wall promote travel anyway?)
Before the Berlin wall was built, people could travel freely within all parts of Berlin and also from the surrounding East Germany to West Berlin. However the border between East and West Germany was already closed in the early 1950s, so Berlin was the last "loophole".
Currently the article has a pair of photos as seen here. If you click on the bottom photo you will see a claim that it was taken at Checkpoint Charlie, not the Glienicker Brücke. Is there some reason to disbelieve this? 207.176.159.9022:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
There's no way that was taken at the Gleinicker Bruecke. Look at the buildings behind it. No such buildings exist(ed) by either end of the bridge from my recollection of living near there at the time. Also, the person who took the picture says they took it at Checkpoint Charlie. Mfield00:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Seperate article for the fall?
Does anyone else think that we should have a seperate article for the fall of the Berlin Wall, seeing as it's one of the most important events in the history of the 20th century? In fact, I think it's shocking that we don't have one already. --The monkeyhate13:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
My feeling is no. I think if there were to be a separate article it should cover the fall of the entire Iron Curtain. Whilst the Berlin Wall itself has become the symbol of the opening up of East/West borders thanks to televison and still images from the city, it was not the first border to be opened up and did not start the process nor does it define it beyond popular culture images. IMHO The fall of the Berlin wall should definitely be covered in an article about the Berlin Wall - as it currently is. Mfield16:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
US and USSR confrontation
There isn't anything mentioned here about how the Americans and Russians almost went to war over the wall- after the wall was put up US diplomats continued to cross the wall to check conditions. They were then denied entry by Soviet tanks. American tanks responded by facing them. Both were fully armed. There was a 30-hour stalemate before the tanks retreated one by one.
Has no-one else heard about this?
User:Reagar
When
Mass demonstrations against the government in East Germany began in the autumn of 1989.
This phrasing is ambiguous because it can be misinterpreted. It would be better to substitute more precise month names here. --B.d.mills10:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I didn't see anything in this article about the opening up of the checkpoints in 1989 and the subsequent tearing down of the wall. Shouldn't such an important even get it's own categorized section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zanshin (talk • contribs) 16:21, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
worth anything?
Is it worth anyones interest that the game world in conflict special edition is going to come with a section of wall inside the box? or is this just pointless triva or better suited on the world in conflict page?.--KerotanTalk Have a nice day :) 06:05, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
During this period 125 people were killed trying to escape to the West, according to official figures.[1] However, a prominent victims' group claims that at least 1,245 people had been killed trying to flee East Germany.[2]
I don't think the second sentence belongs. The first sentence is a claim of how many people died at the Wall. The second reports a claim of how many died total trying to flee E Germany, and they certainly weren't all in Berlin. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆03:58, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
That's how I read it too, and you are entirely right. According to de:Berliner Mauer, the number of victims at the Berlin Wall is still unclear to this day, 125 is the number of casualties that have so far been proven to be related to the Berlin Wall. There have been claims of numbers as high as 238. As for the number of victims on the intra-German border, according to de:Innerdeutsche Grenze#Grenztote the official number is 872 (including cases before 1961), and claims go as high as 1,008 (this is in part also due to differing definitions, e. g. whether to include or not people who died of, say, a heart attack while attempting to flee East Germany or who committed suicide on failing). The two claimed numbers add up to 1,246 which very closely matches the number of 1,245 victims quoted above.
P.S.: The prominent victim's group seems to be the "Arbeitsgemeinschaft 13. August", which runs a museum [4] at the former Checkpoint Charlie in Berlin. It has over the last few years published various claims about the number of victims at the Berlin Wall, the latest of which seems to be 262.
This is an archive of past discussions about Berlin Wall. 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.
![[1]](http://www.charleslipson.com/Images/Breaking-down-Berlin-Wall-1989.jpg){kind=link}
