Talk:Beer Hall Putsch/Archive 2
This is an archive of past discussions about Beer Hall Putsch. 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 |
Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/putsch2.htm. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:08, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
"Hitler Legalité
"Later on, the German people would call him Hitler Legalité or Hitler the Legal One." Where is the source for this preposterous claim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.81.105.222 (talk) 02:01, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- the given source is this 'Enigma: The Caldwell Series'
- Amazon: 'Engima is the continuation of the story begun in the novel LONDON. It is a work of fiction...'
a fictious novel may not be the best source i guess???12:35, 9 November 2014 (UTC)12:35, 9 November 2014 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.172.96.141 (talk)
Quick Question
How could the putsch be inspired by Mussolini's march when it occurred a year later?Radnompieceofgarbage (talk) 11:03, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- This article was changed to incorrect dates, which has now been reverted. The Mussolini march was in October 1922 and this event was November 1923. Kierzek (talk) 15:37, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
"Hitler himself was not wounded during the clash"
It says that "Hitler himself was not wounded during the clash" but this is not entirely accurate. He suffered a dislocated shoulder during the putch. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 23:32, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- That would be considered an injury, not a wound. Kierzek (talk) 23:35, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- Aren't "wound" and "injured" synonyms? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 11:46, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- No. That is incorrect English. A "wound" is tissue/body damage that is the result of intentional infliction by another; and is caused by a weapon or something used as a weapon, like a blunt instrument or it could even be from a teeth bite, for example. A soldier is wounded in battle.
- An "injury" is something one suffers by accident, such as the result of a "slip and fall" or auto accident. A construction worker on a job site suffers an injury. No one has intended you harm or acted maliciously towards you. Unfortunately, like a lot of words and grammar these days, they are not used correctly even by some teachers and professional writers (especially on the web, it seems), who should know better. But, thanks for asking. Footnote: one could say all wounds are a type of injury, in a general sense; however, the opposite is NOT true. All injuries are not wounds. Kierzek (talk) 12:08, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- Well, the sentence is confusing since the terms are considered synonyms.[1] Is there a way to change the wording of this sentence to make it more clear? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 12:35, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- Oxford Dictionary spells out the difference I stated above; see: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com. A wound is a type of injury in general, but not the reverse. With that said, why not change it to: Hitler was injured during the clash, when he suffered a dislocated shoulder, blah, blah, blah. You can put the detail in there as to how he was pulled down. I am at work so I don't have access to my home library for detail and RS citing of it. I can probably get to it soon, if you don't get to it before then. I have been very busy with work and real life lately. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 13:08, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- Well, the sentence is confusing since the terms are considered synonyms.[1] Is there a way to change the wording of this sentence to make it more clear? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 12:35, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- Aren't "wound" and "injured" synonyms? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 11:46, 25 August 2017 (UTC)