Talk:Zero hour (1945)

Capitalisation of German words

I have made an assumption in my recent edit of this page, namely that German ordinary nouns need not be capitalised, as in English. In the previous version of this article all instances of German words (which were then followed by translations to English) started with a capital letter, which I felt was unnecessary. If you speak and write (or are at least familiar with) German and feel I have made an incorrect assumption, please let me know by posting a note here or on my talk and making the necessary connections. Thanks. --Craig 09:03, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

I do speak German and, unlike in English, all nouns in German MUST begin with a capital letter. Therefore, I suggest reverting to the original document which used captials. Many Thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.4.1 (talk) 19:52, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Same for me, and I wholeheartedly agree. Have changed the nouns. Onlyemarie 22:18, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

This article makes some highly dubious and implausible claims. References should be provided.RKloti 23:16, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

900 underground stations bombed.

"The underground stations had been flooded and over 900 of them had been bombed." Are we sure that there were over 900 underground stations in Berlin ? --Lysy^talk 11:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems unlikely. Barnabypage (talk) 16:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

The article now says 90, so I assume it was edited. However, I think even that number may be suspect. I'll do some digging and see what I find. Wood Artist (talk) 09:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)Wood Artist

At the end of the war there were 93 U-Bahn stations still working. So perhaps the number is not too far off. --Duncan (talk) 12:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Lack of sources

This article uses just one source, and makes some radical claims. IN my other research i have found it extremely difficult to find any figures on the destruction of property yet this article states some pretty large numbers... i recommend whoever wrote it find some more reliable sources and that anyone who reads it doesnt take it all as gospel. Shidare 18:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Term "Stunde null"

The site [1] is a schoolproject and not very scientific - As I criticize the term "Stunde null", this site also uses it without reflection. Therefore I ereased it. --Tobe H (talk) 09:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality and Several significant issues

There are several major issues that I would raise. Some of the ideas are poorly expressed, even if valid. The article seems to branch well beyond identifying the term and it's meaning, while ignoring the most major aspect of the term within German society. I will try to find the time to work on it a bit, adding some other references and clearing up some misconceptions. The single source issue is a valid one, and I agree with some others that the statistics cited are questionable. Frank Howley's book, along with The Ruins of the Reich, will supply some good documentation on numbers and such, but I think the article should be narrowed to deal with the term itself, and simply place it in proper context. Does anyone else disagree that the "related history" should probably be cut? Wood Artist (talk) 09:52, 8 May 2009 (UTC)Wood Artist

I should possibly have created a new topic but I feel that the issues presented previously already support the issues I am raising today. So I am taking the liberty to edit the headline of the topic to include the term "Neutrality". I think the neutrality of the tone and presentation of the article should probably undergo some review as I gradually got the impression that the article began to slant toward marginalizing the impact of the terminology particularly on the post war German populations. Eventually I was left with an unclear understanding of the overall past (and if there is a neutrality issue then perhaps present)impact of the terminology and concept on post WWII German media and culture. Of course that could be all just my own pov and I don't have the time or expertise to thoroughly critique it any further overall I found the article very detailed informative and well structured though possibly slanted. I got the impression that a previous editor took pains to prevent it from being slanted but has a perspective on this topic and perhaps fell short of presenting it in neutral styles overall. The slants I'm regarding are a slight preference for antithetical concepts(Ideas that there was no new beginning..etc) that I believe are identified in terms at certain points in the article. Perhaps further reviews by more experienced editors will find it balanced and I may have read to deeply into it and formed a pov. I would point out though that having only a single source...its likely a natural consequence that the article would struggle with neutrality. Also to a lesser but more obvious degree at least one point it assumes the character of being a narrative of persons involved in German society. I quote below in italic the specific line that gives this impression before I offer any analysis.

However, this project of reconstruction is and was so great that we are still in the process of implementing all of the changes today.

So the use of the pronoun "we" in this line seems either non neutral or is a direct quote denoted by the footnote. Its not clear to me how direct quotes are supposed to be distinguished on wikipedia from the overall article but I did not notice any other distinguishing characteristics on the page for that passage..I'll check again after I leave this talk entry. Because I am unclear about those guidelines I will decline to edit the article itself at this time, though If I did, I would probably consider making it a true paraphrase that uses a noun such as "Germany" instead of the non neutral pronoun and also leave the reference citation OR alternatively I would make it a true quote and use guidelines if any about inserting direct quotes and cite the author/publication.SoNetMedia's Alfred O. Mega (talk) 04:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Berlin Section: Crime

"In the areas east of the future Oder-Neisse line already Red Army soldiers committed cruelties against the German population. Allied soldiers sometimes harassed German civilians too. Panic and huge uncertainty instantly created much damage in the areas still controlled by the Nazi German Wehrmacht on May 8, 1945 (e.g. western Austria, Bavaria, South Tyrol (Italy), East Frisia and Schleswig-Holstein)."

The quoted end of Berlin Crime's section has little to nothing to do with Berlin. We should put it somewhere else, otherwise it gives way to confusing ideas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.190.89.192 (talk) 15:01, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

"Elendswinter"

There was a Hungerwinter in 1946/47, which is probably meant. Regards, Tasmer (talk) 16:27, 25 September 2015 (UTC)