 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
POV tag edit
Looking at a book by Robert Anthony Krieg Theologians and Nazi germany - it is hard to recognise the kind of things i was reading with the simple anti-nazi of the article - "In the summer of 1933, Adam called for a reconciliation betwen the Church and the new govt. ..p.99 the new laws that restrict the involvement of Jews in german society are valid said Adam, because germans have a duty to strngthen their racial identity " p.104 "It is not clear, however, that adam ever acknowledged his own misjudgment about and complicity with the Third Reich It seems this may be another case of a dishonest conservative Catholic agenda being foisted on articles , its aim to whitewash the catholic Church and to foster a 'myth of conservative Catholic resistance to the Nazis.' Galen, Faulaber, Adam - Please leave the tag until I have read the krieg book - the tag is a warning in the meantime that right wing distortions and whitewashers may have meddled with the portrait of the subject of the article. Sayerslle (talk) 23:19, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
S2CIDs edit
@Abductive: it looks as though you've used Citation bot here to revert this edit of mine. Could you clarify why you think these links are useful? They don't, as far as I can see, point to accessible versions of the article or to any other useful information. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:25, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Arms & Hearts: This is a question for User:Citation bot, which does about 2,100 edits per day, but actually checks about 8,200 articles a day. Users sometimes complain about what look like unhelpful edits, usually to bibliographies. I have put the nobots template in the article. Abductive (reasoning) 04:21, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Abductive: It would be much more in the spirit of collaborative and collegial work, in my view, if editors would take responsibility for edits they instruct the bot to make. I appreciate there's a scale problem, and I'm basically prepared to accept the bot as a net positive for the encyclopaedia, but we'd presumably be reluctant to tolerate these unconstructive edits and this unresponsive behaviour from a human editor. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 11:03, 15 August 2023 (UTC)