Talk:Martin Hohmann

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion: Interfaith

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.

Partial- flag as bias

Partial - and not based on factual content of speach but on interpretation of onlooker, bringing in interpretation with bias, and also ignoring the historical facts Hohmann brings up. Author of text als shows clare bias against Hohmann, interpreting his speach in the worst possible way. -this is an academicly weak article that does not stand up to scrutiny.

NMJ ~ BA.pol.sci

84.49.93.211 (talk) 03:51, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What NMJ claims is correct. The Article shows clear bias against Martin Hohmann, in that it presents almost no arguments supporting Mr. Hohmann's speech's claims. The article in it's current form provides a false debate, where it states Mr. Hohmann's claims (out of context) and then proceeds to tear them down.

158.36.225.232 (talk) 16:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article does of course not support Mr. Hohmann's interpretations of history, as he is merely repeating antisemitic stereotypes that have been effectively discarded long ago. The interpretation of Hohmann's speech follows the public and scientific reception and, last but not least, the decision of the Berliner Kammergericht in Hohmann's appeal against his exclusion from the CDU. The decision can be found here (in German, of course). --Papphase (talk) 08:01, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The Article shows clear bias against Martin Hohmann, in that it presents almost no arguments supporting Mr. Hohmann's speech's claims."

Maybe that is because there ARE NO "arguments supporting Mr. Hohmann's speech's claims".

To call the CDU/CSU "centre-right" is the height of ridiculousness. They are not even Sacred Heart Socialists. They are Socialists pure and simple.

-- 84.180.181.37 (talk) 07:29, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV issues

The article as it stands does not reflect a neutral point of view. The first section, which is supposedly a description of his speech, appears instead to re-argue Hohmann's thesis in new words. This passage, for example, highlights the problem well:

He notes that, while the notion of collective guilt is usually denied, it is very much applied to Germans. Other nations tend to white-wash their history, like the French who hail the bloody French revolution as some kind of emancipation and the imperialist dictator Napoleon as a benevolent father of the people.

The discursive techniques adopted here are emotive and do not reflect an impartial tone. The final paragraph of the section appears to be an uncited interpretation of the speech.

The second section is also problematic. Some statements are badly sourced, with source articles being twisted to support a particular point of view: namely, that Hohmann's expulsion was unjustified. For instance, the Economist article cited to support the statement that the expulsion "rais[ed] some concerns that the party did not share the zeal of his critics" does not state such a thing at all, even overlooking the non-impartial tone of the statement itself. The most conspicuous example of source articles being twisted to support a non-impartial conclusion arrives two lines later: "According to The Independent, support for free speech was far higher than expected."

Accordingly, I will attempt to rewrite some of the article. Other contributions are, of course, welcome. Cyril Washbrook (talk) 11:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]