Talk:Oskar Schindler/Archive 1

Archive 1

Misleading sentence

"When advances of the Red Army threatened to liberate the camps, they were destroyed, and a majority of the inmates were executed." I now realize that this sentence meant the general concentration camps and NOT schindler's camp but it was kind of confusing. If I am correct, it would be helpful if someone reworded that sentence. Flyerhell 08:39, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

spy?

Quote; Today it's known that Schindler was an Abwehr agent

Can anyone shed more light on this? -- Andrew Chung 18:24, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

A large part of the Abwehr was covertly opposing the Nazis, including its Chief, Wilhelm Canaris, and several key-officers. One source that states Schindler as an Abwehr agent is David Crowe's Schindler bibliography.

Thank you for the link sorry who put their comment here earlier but u didnt time stamp or leave your name (Yes i know i didn't leave my name earlier but i did not know how to use wikipedia before) -- Andrew Chung 18:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Birthdate

The introduction says he was born on the 18th of April. However, section 1 says he was born on the 28th of April. Which is correct? secton 21

Schindler was arrested twice on suspicion of conspiracy, but managed both times to avoid being jailed.

The same "twice" mentioned earlier? Xx236 12:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Irrelevant and ungrammatical sentence

"He was born into a wealthy business family, for all of Schindler’s child hood he was spoiled, his parents bought him anything he wanted and made sure that he lived a full life." I'm deleting this sentence. It should be footnoted or something; plus it is just poorly written, so it's gone.

His Grave

Ive seen the movie, and I know that the stones have been put by the Jews he's saved. Are the stones glued sumhow so that no one takes them? paat 19:59, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I have been to the cemetary in Jerusalem where Oskar Schindler is buried (in March of 1999). I do not know if it was a Catholic, Protestant, or Jewish cemetary, but I can tell you that the rocks are there, and they are not glued on. Having seen the movie, the sight of the stones is, for some reason, very moving. --Shawnsgia 07:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Clarification needed

"Schindler...tried—again with help from the Jewish organization—to establish a cement factory." What organization? Clarityfiend 21:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Idiocy

Removed "He has been arested many times once he was arrested for thanking and then kissing a small jewish girl on the day of his 36th birthday."

No source can confirm this, besides, of course, Schindler's List. This is why we don't write articles based off movies.

Added real arrest information.

-alex12_3

It's stated in the currect version of the article that he was arrested for kissing a Jewish girl. Is this or isn't this correct? -68.114.154.249 22:36, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

==

I have read in a few places (although I don't know nearly enough to write about it) that Schindler armed the Jews in his protection. Some information on this omission would be worthwhile in the article, if anyone knows more or can research it. Lord Bodak 22:32, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

An endearing conclusion sentence would be nice

Such as; "He gambled a way through history's currents that are shaped, once dug beneath the surface, by men of quite ordinary convictions and preoccupations and mannerisms and fears, and he occasionally won." Cretanforever

Poetic, but out of place in an encyclopedia. Clarityfiend 20:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

his grave and what his factories made

The engraved words on his grave, what do they mean? and in the entry he only had the enamelware factory, did he have an ammunitions factory too?

I don't know about the Hebrew (or perhaps Yiddish?), but the German says: "the unforgettable lifesaver of 1200 persecuted Jews". Junes 20:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello : Someone vandalized the section "Early Life." Just pointing this out.

Works Cited=

There are no citing notes referenced anywhere in the entire article. Where'd all this info come from? I'm putting a cleanup template at the top. 201.68.117.231 23:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The third Christian named Righteous Among the Nations

This is probably true since someone put it here. However to me it gave me the idea that only three Christians were given this honor. If you check out the article you will see that several thousands of people, mostly who lived in Nazi occupied Europe, were so honored. I'm sure that many of them were Christians. I also don't think the Israeli government considered a person's religion in awarding the honor. Steve Dufour 00:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I've edited that paragraph in the article, as there were a number of misstatements. As has been written elsewhere, in fact over 21,000 have been so honored. The award, by definition, is to remember those Gentiles (most of whom were certainly Christians) for saving Jews during the Holocaust. JGHowes 00:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Grave

I went to Jerusalem in April '06 and visited his grave.

Stones are left on a grave by those who visit. This is a Jewish tradition, as opposed to a Christian one. Despite Schindler neither being Jewish nor buried in a Jewish cemetery, it is unsurprising to see the numerous stones on his grave.

Hope that helps

82.33.50.141 18:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

References

There are lots of books and external links for this article, but would it be possible for someone to provide inline references based on this material? Citing your sources is crucial for verifiability purposes. We all know what Schindler did, but we need to be able to prove it through reliable sources. See WP:CITE and Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Article Cleanup for more information. -- Qarnos 09:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Number of saved Jews

Several days before, somebody changed the number in the initial sentence "Oskar Schindler (28 April 1908 – 9 October 1974) was a Sudeten German industrialist credited with saving as many as 1,200 Jews" to 1,100 Jews. In fact, this number is closer to the reality, but why I suggest to keep the original number is, that Schindler is usually and widely known as the man who saved 1,200 Jews. I think the number 1,200 c r e d i t e d to him could be there together with the real number 1,100 below (may be with explaining comment)--Honzula 11:02, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

If you have documentation for 1,100 people, then do change it, but before even making such a comment, you should have your facts checked, and documentated, or else it's pretty useless. Besides, his own grave says 1,200, which was put there by the very same people that he saved. - Kirjapan 05:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

190000000?

The statement "He saved as many as 19 0000000 Jews " seems to be off by an order of magnitude or two... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.134.80.93 (talk) 08:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

• This edit by unregistered user 203.208.93.226 has been reverted. How can an unregistered user edit this page, anyway? JGHowes 17:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

regrettably, the "semi-protection" for this article has now expired and my request today for renewal of semi-protection was declined, so this article is now vulnerable to anonymous IP vandalism and mischief JGHowes 23:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I would highly recommend semi-protection against (anonymous) nazis today, denying the holocaust etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kirjapan (talk • contribs) 05:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

How many were saved by Schindler?

1,200 jews saved

After reading a letter written by Oskar Schindler’s former workers, signed: Isaak Stern, former employee Pal. Office in Krakow, Dr. Hilfstein, Chaim Salpeter, Former President of the Zionist Executive in Krakow for Galicia and Silesia.

There was the statement: "Here we are, a gathering of 1100 people, 800 men and 300 women.

However there is mention in the letter of another 100 people that schindler saved: "Concerning Director Schindler's treatment of the Jews, one event that took place during our internment in Bruennlitz in January of this year which deserves special mention was coincidentally a transport of Jewish inmates, that had been evacuated from the Auschwitz concentration camp, Goleschow outpost, and ended up near us. This transport consisted exclusively of more than 100 sick people from a hospital which had been cleared during the liquidation of the camp. These people reached us frozen and almost unable to carry on living after having wandered for weeks. No other camp was willing to accept this transport and it was Director Schindler alone who personally took care of these people, while giving them shelter on his factory premises; even though there was not the slightest chance of them ever being employed. He gave considerable sums out of his own private funds, to enable their recovery as quick as possible. He organized medical aid and established a special hospital room for those people who were bedridden. It was only because of his personal care that it was possible to save 80 of these people from their inevitable death and to restore them to life."

Were these 100 people (80 that lived) ever accounted for in this article?

5/01/07 1:22am(Pacific)24.13.9.213 08:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Nate24.13.9.213 08:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Homosexual? Illegitimate children?

Note: I'm putting this back in after an anonymous user at 60.240.56.128 removed it a couple of weeks ago without explanation. (I'd like to know why this was removed, and how it went undetected.) -71.80.31.11 11:29, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I came across the following statement on the IMDb board for Schindler's List:

"But last year, I learned from a biography about Oskar Schindler by David M. Crowe (it was vehemently appraised even in Germany, thus it is most probably true), that Oskar Schindler had a homosexual relationship with Amon Goeth."

Apparently the biography in question is called "Oskar Schindler: The Untold Account Of His Life, Wartime Activities, And the True Story Behind 'the List'". I've heard no mention of this elsewhere, but it's definitely something that should be added to the article if it can be confirmed. -68.114.154.249 22:48, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I found the following article (originally from the NY Times) speaking of the biography:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Schindler/OOF1104.html

There is also a claim that he fathered two illegitimate children.

Furthermore, the claim in this Wikipedia article that "In 1963, Oskar Schindler was named a Righteous Gentile (non-Jew)" may be incorrect.

I'm going to check the local libraries for this book, as it should provide quite a bit of information not mentioned in this article. -68.114.154.249 14:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: http://www.fpp.co.uk/Auschwitz/Schindler/OOF1104.html

David Irving is hardly a useful source; the original NY Times article would be.

I'm not saying that link should be used in the article, I just couldn't find any other archive of the NY Times article to use in the talk page. The actual biography by David Crowe should be used to reference these facts, if it can be obtained. -68.114.154.249 16:37, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I've just removed a reference to his being gay, but only because it appeared in the opening sentence of the World War II section where it clearly doesn't belong even if it was true.--WPaulB 17:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

"See Also" Section

I think there should be some kind of note here that explains who the people in this list are and what relevance they have to the Schindler article. Obviously, if you click on a few of the names and take a cursory glance at the articles, you'll be able to figure out that these people are others who like Schindler, saved Jews during the Holocaust. However, there should some sort of note stating that, just to clarify the section and avoid confusion. Jxw13 15:07, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Any editor can take a few minutes to check a link in this section and add a comment.--TraceyR 18:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Place of death

The article's text says he died in Frankfurt, while the infobox says he died in Hildesheim. Olessi (talk) 04:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I took a look and was unable to find an authoritative source for this. Some sites report Hildesheim and others Frankfurt. I think part the confusion is "A former neighbor of Schindler's in Frankfurt, Dieter Trautwein, confirmed that Oscar Schindler spent the last months of his life in Hildersheim with his friends after becoming ill."[1]

It seems well established that he was living in Frankfurt and apparently after the suitcase was found in Hildesheim it was learned that he sent the last few months of his life in Hildersheim. It's assumed this report is correct and not an invented rationalization for how the suitcase ended up in Hildersheim. The report though does not help in knowing whether Schindler was still in Hildersheim or had gone back to Frankfurt immediately prior to his death.

Presumably someone will need to dig up an obituary or news article that reports on his death that would report on if he spent his final hours with family, friends, etc. and where they were. It seems more likely that he did die in Hildersheim. Neither of the city web sites[2][3] shed light on this though both cities have roads named Oskar-Schindler. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 21:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Marc: According to a plaque on a house in Hildesheim ref, he died in Hildesheim. Apparently he moved there from Frankfurt in 1971, to live with a Dr. Staehr and his wife (whom he had met while in Israel) in their house in Göttingstraße 30. He died in the St. Bernward Hospital in Hildesheim ref. Will you make the change to the article? --TraceyR (talk) 00:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Tracey. I see you have already updated the main article. Thank you. I added a reference tag to point to the site you found. Using the data you found I found a blog[4] which has more details and also the same photo as the site you found. The curious thing is the resolution of this photo is much better and you can actually read the plaque. Click on the magnifier. The photographer, Klaus Metzger, is credited and which leads to http://www.spock.com/Klaus-Metzger where he says he lives in Hildesheim. Unfortunately, we can't use a blog as a "reference" but apparently Mr. Metzger is the one that blogged up a visit to the Hildesheim house and the photo was then taken and scaled down for their site. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 11:10, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not too sure that's a "reliable source" insofar as Wikipedia guidelines are concerned; so to be on the safe side, I've added the City of Hildesheim's official website archive page on the subject (albeit in German), which states unequivocally that Schindler died at Bernward Hospital there. JGHowes ^talk - 15:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

You can be sure, that he died in Hildesheim. I am from Hildesheim! I am a little disappointed that our city named only a very small street after him in the suburb of Hildesheim. He lived in Hildesheim from 1971 - 1974 in the house of Dr. Heinrich Stähr and his wife Annemarie (Ami) Stähr in the Göttingstraße 30. During this time he was already very ill from a stroke. The son of the Stährs, Chris, found the suitcase in the attic and took it to Stuttgart. But first, he went to the Hildesheimer Allgemeine Zeitung, to tell them of his discovery. But in Hildesheim all is a little bit slow and provincial. The editors didn't recognized the value of the documents and showed no interest. So he took the suitcase to Stuttgart and the Stuttgarter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper made a big story out of it. They sold the story worldwide. Emilie Schindler, the widow of Oskar, sued the Stuttgarter Allgemeine Zeitung because of the money they made with the publication of the suitcase documents. She said, the suitcase belongs to her, his wife. She lived in Argentina in poverty. She said she would loved to live in a residential home for the elderly in Regensburg, Germany, but has no money for it. She only got 25.000 Euro. But during her last days she met a lot of prominents (B. Clinton, S. Spielberg, G. Schröder, pope Johannes Paul II. among others) and didn't return to Argentina. She died after a stroke 2001 near Berlin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.131.236.30 (talk) 18:03, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

List of Holocaust Heroes?

The "See also" section is growing to an unwieldy size. Maybe it's time to create a "List of Holocaust Heroes" article and move these - consensus? JGHowes ^talk - 18:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Sensible idea. I agree. --TraceyR (talk) 19:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

See the existing List of people who assisted Jews during the Holocaust, Righteous Among the Nations and List of Righteous Among the Nations by country.--Pharos (talk) 22:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

The problem is these lists aren't always shown as "See also" wlinks, such as this one (until today). Not all Holocaust-related articles seem to have the {{The Holocaust}} tag, thus the existence of these list articles is not always readily apparent to the casual reader. I've just done a Redirect page from "Holocaust rescuers" to List of people who assisted Jews during the Holocaust, matching the piped wikilink already at {{The Holocaust}} for readers searching from the Main Page or articles not having the Holocaust template. I've also replaced the lengthy list of individual names with wikilinks at "See also" to the above Articles/Lists. JGHowes ^talk - 06:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Mind the Gap

Can we do anything about the large gap between the paragraphs of World War II? I'm using a high-resolution wide-screen monitor, and the gap is more than a 1/2 screen deep.--WPaulB (talk) 16:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The problem is with {{The Holocaust}} template, because it's overlapping the article sections. I've shuffled the images to fit it (almost) within the WWII section. This should be better now JGHowes ^talk - 22:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Quick fail GA

I'm failing this GA because there are no citations in the World War II section, the largest portion of the article. There are only 11 sources used, and the lead is too short. By doing this, I am not discouraging any editors from improving it. On the contrary, bringing an article to GA or FA takes a lot of work and a tiny bit of obsession. I like to say that editors who are willing to put the amount of work into an article to see it through these processes honor their subjects. Schindler deserves to be honored, and this article doesn't yet do it. I hope I see it again soon in a better state. If you have questions or comments, please contact my talk page. --Moni3 (talk) 18:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Number of saved jews changed again... (were the children counted?)

Ok, now I changed the number of saved jews from "almost 1,100" to "almost 1,200", this time with added sources, finally. 1,098 people according to the list itself and 100 people according to a letter signed by Isaak Stern and more. See main article for sources. -- Kirjapan 05:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

The additional 100 people is apparently a group that Schindler persuaded the Germans to send to his factory as it needed additional workers[5].

Assuming the list was created in early 1944[6] then one puzzle is that it does not have anyone the age of 14. This page[7] indicates there were children at Plaszow but it's not clear if any were transferred to Brunnlitz. The story says 800 men were shipped to Brunnlitz and 300 women and children were accidentally routed to Auschwitz. That adds up to 1100 but there are no children on the list.

These pages also refer to the children

• [8] - "Oscar Schindler was a modern Noah", Pfefferberg said, "he saved individuals, husbands and wives and their children, families."
• [9] - "He loved children; he would always call us 'kinder, kinder."

The implication is that Oskar Schindler saved 1098 "adults" age 14 on up in the main list plus 100 additional adults he had transferred to work in Brunnlitz plus an unknown number of children that were with these adults. This may be why some sources credit him with saving 1300 people. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 07:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

As an update on this - I watched the movie Schindler's List last night and the movie shows children on the trains from Plaszow with boys on the train to Brunnlitz and girls on the train to Auschwitz and then Brunnlitz meaning 1098 adults (age 14 up) plus an unknown number of children under were transferred from Plaszow to Brunnlitz. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 09:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I counted in the movie and there were 8 boys and 17 girls. So that's how many extra he saved. 69.143.226.129 (talk) 03:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Emigration to Argentina

The article states this: "Eventually, Schindler emigrated to Argentina in 1948", but a plague on a house in Regensburg/Bavaria ([10]) says: "Oskar Schindler saved 1200 jews during the Nazi-terror. He lived in Regensburg from November 1945 till May 1950, at first here and later in the house Alte Nürnberger Straße 25" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.171.250.243 (talk) 15:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Expression in World War II section

Apart of the citation issues, some of the sentences are a bit awkward. I don't like changing other people's work without consensus, so let me just propose some minor enhancements. And no, I'm not an English teacher.

1. Why does it say that he obtained the factory "not from an expropriated Jew under Nazi Aryanization policies but ...". Did someone say that he did get it that way? Did the movie imply it? Needs removal or clarification.

2. "Schindler renamed the factory Deutsche Emaillewaren-Fabrik, or DEF, to manufacture enamelware." I suspect he renamed it because he intended to manufacture enamelware there, not to enable him to manufacture enamelware there.

3. "He obtained around 1,000 Jewish slave labourers to work there with the help of his Jewish accountant Itzhak Stern." How about, "With the help of his Jewish accountant Itzhak Stern he obtained around 1,000 Jewish slave labourers to work there."

4. His response when the accountant wouldn't shake his hand: not really a quoteable quote, is it? Not a pearl of wisdom from which we can all benefit. Adds nothing to the article, sheds no light on anything, gratuitous.

5. "He became a well-respected guest on SS parties ..." At, not on.

6. "Harming his workers would result in complaints and demands for compensation from the government." This sentence should be re-written in the past tense.

7. The sentence "Hence Schindler made no money; rather, his previously earned fortune was getting steadily smaller from bribing officers and caring for his workers" uses tense inconsistently. How about "his fortune gradually diminished as he bribed officials and cared for his workers"? SelectSplat (talk) 02:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree with your points and suggest you go ahead and edit the article accordingly. No one owns the article, after all, and it does need some rewriting. Also, the unsourced stuff (in particular, supposed quotations) should go. JGHowes ^talk - 13:10, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

German profanity

Regarding Schindler's response, when told it was not proper to shake a Jew's hand, this Article for a long time just stated the German word without an English translation, referring to it as "a German scatological term".

Recently, the English translation was inserted by an Editor. The problem with that is many school and home filters will block the article, as a result. This would be unfortunate, in my opinion, because many high school students research Oskar Schindler when studying the Holocaust, and should be able to access this Wikipedia article.

On the other hand, I realize that Schindler's response (although not sourced in this Article, which is another problem) does give insight into his frame of mind and attitude towards Nazi Germany's Nuremburg Laws discriminating against Jews.

So, as a solution, I've "veiled" the English translation by linking it in-line to the Wiki English translation of German profane terms: that way, anyone who wants to can click on the English translation readily, without the main article being blocked by software filters. If anyone has a better idea, I'm all ears. JGHowes 00:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

For me the "insight into his frame of mind and attitude towards Nazi Germany's Nuremburg Laws discriminating against Jews" is clearly shown by his support of Nazi military organization (I mean Abwehr) before the war, by his entry to NSDAP after the war's beginninig, by his participation in the stealing of jewish propety (he gained twice the jewish factory!), engaging of jewish slaves etc.--Honzula 11:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

What I mean: this story for me is nothing more then a story and could be omitted. But we cannot say it's true or false, because the only hypothetical witnesses were Schindler and Itzak Stern and they both say it happened. But I'm sure, the story shows only the Schindler's attitude to rules and not his attitude to the Nazi policy. But of course I cannot prove... --Honzula 11:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Soemone unlinked the term and added the English vulgarity again.--WPaulB 20:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I've added a ref to the word scheiße with a link to Wiktionary. Hope it will be useful to people. -- 06:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Agree with Kirjapan; this covers all bases. The article explains that it's a "German scatological term" and the link is explicit. This way, the article will be accessible to students and won't be blocked by school and home filters. JGHowes ^talk - 15:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it's incorrect to say it's a scatological term. Scheiße appears to be a vulgarity and not related to the study of feces. I daresay people involved in scatology don't refer to it as "shit", but rather "stool" or "feces", which could be correctly described as scatological terms. Just call it what it is: profanity, vulgarity, whatever. The word 'scatological' is not only inappropriate but also unneccessary as the link to the definition takes care of it anyway.--Jeff79 (talk) 05:17, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Done.--Jeff79 (talk) 14:11, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

According to several of the definitions retrieved by Google for "define: scatology", both the study of faeces and use of the word as an expletive are covered by the term, e.g. Wordnet/Princeton:

• a preoccupation with obscenity (especially that dealing with excrement or excretory functions)
• (medicine) the chemical analysis of excrement (for medical diagnosis or for paleontological purposes)

   [scatology]

I suppose that anyone whose school and/or parents want to 'protect' them from such terms will be unable to follow the link either, so where does that leave us? --TraceyR (talk) 17:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I really don't see any problem at all with the status quo.--Jeff79 (talk) 03:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Lock this article

I have just removed some foul abuse from the Post-War section. I suggest this article be locked in the current climate of anti-semitism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.97.21.226 (talk) 22:47, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Pius XII and Oscar Schindler

Concerning both Oskar Schindler and Pius XII, I noticed that there was a debate concerning on who had saved the most Jews, and why both have been treated so differently by post-war historians. Although Schindler was himself a Catholic, some historians may have argued that he saved Jews in spite of his religion and not because of it, and that the same would also be correct for Pius XII. [11] ADM (talk) 08:35, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Billy Littlewolf

Why is he named as Billy Littlewolf? methinks that may not be right

• That was vandalism by a now-blocked user. The vandalized version has been reverted.  JGHowes  ^talk 22:40, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Why No Behiç Erkin?

During the same period, the Turkish diplomat Behiç Erkin saved at least 20,000 jewish people which had Turkish or Non-Turkish background to go death camps. I would expect that Israeli users would also translate the article of him into Hebrew. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.154.117.108 (talk) 07:10, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I remember a docu about a Japanese diplomat in one of the Baltic states who also saved Jews, but my memory on this is sketchy. Maybe some scholar could pool the information for an article like: Courageous individuals who saved Jews. (My Grandmother in Berlin had hidden one in her attic and he did get out. But I have no further information. She also paid full price for a building, but the Jewish owner had left it a little late and did not manage to get out. My Grandmother does not need a memorial.) 121.209.51.37 (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The Case

In the Autumn of 1999 a case was discovered in the attic of a house which had belonged to friends of Schindler, containing over 7,000 documents and photographs which had belonged to Oskar Schindler. The "Stuttgarter Zeitung" (the local newspaper) analysed the contents of the case; Emilie Schindler received copies, the originals (including the list of the names of those he had saved and the text of his speech before leaving 'his Jews' in 1945) ending up in the Holocaust Museum of Yad Vashem in Israel. Emilie was finally awarded €25,000, but not the case and the documents, from the paper.

The first reference link is now behind apay-to-view archive, and the second is in German. I can't read German and Babelfish gives an awful translation, so what is this about? I don't even see mention of his wife in the remaining available article. A case was found containing documents and photographs owned by Oskar. His wife got copies, the originals went to Yad Vashem, and Emilie got €25000 from "the paper"? Some kind of property settlement obviously, but was there a fight over ownership or soemthing?--WPaulB 19:26, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Emilie Schindler lived in great poverty in Argentina. She was looked after by a Jewish lady Erika Rosenberg. I met both in Sudetendeutsches Haus in Munich. Emilie was still angry about her husband´s womanizing. I felt sorry for the Schindlers because they were expelled from Zwittau like other Sudeten Germans after 1945, like me as a baby and my family.--Wurzeln und Flügel (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

The Czech factory: making or not making rocket parts etc?

During the final year of the war, after the business and the group of "Schindlerjuden" had been moved south-west (to Böhmen-Mähren): "In Brněnec, he gained another former Jewish factory, where he was supposed to produce missiles and hand grenades for the war effort. However, during the months that this factory was running, not a single weapon produced could actually be fired. Hence Schindler made no money; rather, his previously earned fortune grew steadily smaller as he bribed officials and cared for his workers."

The text, here, is both ambiguous and misrepresenting what the source article is saying, and that's the more serious because those months are crucial to how Schindler is viewed. Steinhouse's article says no weapons or no weapons parts were produced - nothing of that kind even left the factory gates: "Ostensibly the new factory was producing parts for V2 bombs, but, actually, the output during those ten months between July and May was absolutely nil." There is no claim here that he lost money because the weapons parts were dysfunctional or misfiring, and actually the Germans wouldn't have been testing the equipment every time before receiving it and, in case it worked, paying him, would they? It actually reads like a whitewashing statement. In Steinhouse's version, Schindler's factory had zero output, not even faulty output), but how would he have kept it in legit operation that way for many months in a highly fraught environment? On the other hand, it would have been wholly uncharacteristic of Schindler as a person and of his awareness of the stakes of business to try to joke with the Wehrmacht by deliberately producing dud equipment - only dud equipment? - for the rockets (and other kinds of munitions?). He must have been aware at once that exposed sabotage would be punishable by death with just a mock trial.

The claim that Schindler and his jews didn't really take part in the German war effort is, of course, morally crucial in a way. If they did help produce V2 rockets, the whole venture becomes somewhat less heroic. Not seen from the point of view of those directly involved, but from the point of "how many lives saved in the end?" and "whose side was he on?" - the allied bomb raid on Dresden has often been justified by pointing to the munitions factories in that city, and other cities: they were part of the war effort. Seen from the German side and possibly to allied military or judiciary who might (an imaginary case) have heard about it shortly after the war, Schindler would be plainly a war profiteer, another businessman making money off the opportunities given him by the German occupation and the captivity of Jews, and that's how some people today actually view him; it's also stated in the article (and implicitly in the film) that this is what he was when he began hiring Jews.

I personally don't see it as absolutely damning if the factory produced rocket parts and shells, but he was helping the army anyway, right from the start, and this is actually how complex it gets. He managed to keep up a business that provided shelter for some Jews, some of whom survived, but other Jews and civilians were killed by the war machine supported by the production line of his factories. Now, Steinhouse's article is, as stated at the top of the linked page, "the only account that includes /or, builds on/ direct contemporary /late 1940s/ interviews with Schindler himself, as well as with the accountant Itzhak Stern". Keneally never met them, and obviously neither Schindler, nor Stern or any of their families, nor any of the Schindlerjuden, would want to say that the factory actually produced any kind of functioing shells and parts relating to V1/V2 rockets. Steinhouse was clearly very much for Schindler after meeting him. There are no surviving documents of the factory proving it either way and then I suppose we really don't know. The novel and the film don't prove anything, however angaging they do not incorporate or make historical records. And survival stories of this kind tend to be (half- or unconsciously) fictionalized and tidied up a bit, just like, in countries like Denmark, Yugoslavia and France, everyone claimed after the war to have been part of the underground resistance: the popular memory was that the entire people, except a few fat cats and scoundrels, had stood united against the Nazis. Since most people know Schindler's story only from the film, which, great as it is, is also sentimental in some places and plainly fiction, I suggest this article should take care not to harmonize the story from the film or other non-historical, or historically deficient, sources.Strausszek (talk) 04:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The Movie

This article is very obviously based off of the movie Schindler's List. Some of the facts contained therein are should be validated by someone other than Steven Spielberg. For instance is there any evidence his munitions factory intentionally produced faulty weapons? 24.71.243.210 (talk) 04:26, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Of course not, and I can't believe that it's taken 1½ years before someone finally summoned up the guts to remove it. See my own post from August 2010 in the lower end of this page, stating the argument. Didn't even get a response to that one. Great. Well, now I've finally cut it.Strausszek (talk) 03:27, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Did he get any award or recognition?

I would like to know if Schindler got any award for his brave work from any government institute. Be it monetory or else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.181.46.171 (talk) 15:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

He was awarded the title and associated benefits of Righteous Among The Nations. Masterhomer 20:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

And he got the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1965 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.5.184.243 (talk) 09:24, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Oskar&Emilie 1946.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Oskar&Emilie 1946.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Oskar&Emilie 1946.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:22, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 April 2012

laborers is spelled wrong 66.97.118.210 (talk) 21:16, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

The article seems to be written in UK English, with spellings such as 'labour' and 'cancelled'. Wikipedia policy on national varieties of English is generally to retain the existing spellings. The full policy is here. William Avery (talk) 21:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Number of Jews Saved

According to this page, it is 1,100, but his wife's page lists 1,200 - 1,700. I'm not sure which is off, but could somebody please fix it? 67.242.136.224 (talk) 01:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Keneally

The final section mentions thomas keneally and the possession of his original list. The name of Keneally is not referenced through to the Thomas Keneally page. Is it possible to do so? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.114.114.46 (talk) 16:29, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated wording

"Schindler brutally gained the ownership of a factory..." What does that mean? Provide a source and an explanation please. Clarityfiend 20:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC) .. hmm

I have a testimony, given under oath to Yad Vashem on this issue. It was given in Polish and I have the official translation to Hebrew([pages 4-5 herein]). For some reason the link doesn't work. Please copy it into the address bar of your browser.

Additionally, i have the unofficial undocumented numerous testimonies of Nathan Wurzel to me - I'm his grandson. Eyal Keidar —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ekeidar (talk • contribs) 18:40, August 22, 2007 (UTC).

What the above author likely meant to link to is "see pages 4-5 herein" (-> for external links use only a single bracket). --Methossant (talk) 17:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Cemetary

"...[Schindler] was buried in the Protestant Cemetery, Mount of Olives in Jerusalem."

I was just watching the bonus material from the movie Schindler's List, and according to it, Schindler's buried on Mount Zion, a Catholic cemetery. Since I'm no expert in WWII history, I simply point out the discrepency here. Hopefully some other more knowledgable Wikipedian can sort it out.

Sounds more probable. I dont know Schindlers religion, but since alot of germans of the Southern regions of Germany were&are catholics, it would make sense to pressume he was a catholic.

Schindler was catholic.178.210.114.106 (talk) 18:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Schindler purposely produced faulty ammunition in an attempt to put the German military at a disadvantage during the war.

Were the Germans so naive, like in propaganda movies, to buy faulty products or rather executed too smart producers? Xx236 12:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I guess its taken from the movie more or less. --Not an acc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.131.84.212 (talk) 01:04, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Only in the movie178.210.114.106 (talk) 18:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Contentious edits unsupported by sources

I have twice reverted additions by Smith2006. The reasoning is as follows:

• the claim that Schindler "remained a practicing Roman Catholic throughout his life". The source quoted says "Die Eltern, Hans und Franziska Schindler, waren Kleinunternehmer, bürgerlich, gut katholisch". This is clearly referring to his parents, not Schindler himself.
• the claim that Schindler was an "ethnic German nationalist" is unsourced.

well he was a member of the Sudetengerman Party and than the Nazi party - that's source enogh to call him a (ethnic) German nationalist — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.210.114.106 (talk) 18:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

• the claim that "After a Requiem Mass Schinlder was buried at the Catholic Franciscans' cemetery" is inaccurate. What the source given actually says is "Nach einer evangelischen und katholischen Trauerfeier in Frankfurt/M. wird Oskar Schindler auf eigenen Wunsch hin auf dem Franziskaner-Friedhof in Jerusalem auf dem Berg Zion beigesetzt", in other words after a Protestant and Catholic funeral service in Frankfurt Schindler was buried at his own request in the Franciscan cemetery on Mount Zion in Jerusalem.

Most of the rest - such as changing 'Nazi Party' to 'National Socialist German Workers' Party of Hitler' and changing 'Nazi-occupied Czechoslovakia' to 'dismantled Czechoslovakia' is imcomprehensible, and possibly POV-inspired. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 16:25, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

As Schindler was a Catholic, and as Schindler was buried at a Catholic cemetery, it is clear he was buried after a Requiem Mass in the Catholic rite. I know you are an ardent Atheist, but you cannot falsify facts. The Evangelical service was done for the family of his (Protestant) wife!!! Schindler was a German nationalist, he cooperated with the Abwehr. All sourced. You do not read German and you do not accept authoritative sources, because they do not fit YOUR POV. The claim that Schindler was "not particularly religious" was not sourced however, and Schindler continued to attend Mass, was baptized a Catholic, received a Catholic St. Sylvester Order, and was buried as a Catholic. What proof do you need more? He was an ordinary Roman Catholic, but the "never very religious" claim comes from anti-Catholic or anti-religious persons like you. Atheists and agnostics who biasedly think morality comes from rejection of God. Stop your downtracking me and my edits. You are annoying and a desperate person. This is clear.Smith2006 (talk) 00:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Unsupported is your (Atheist POV) claim that Schindler was "never very religious", which is a POV statement not backed by any source. To me it would be irrelevant, but it is wrong to call into doubt my clear sources which prove the man was a Catholic until the end of his life, by claiming the sources do not tell anything, while yourself making unsourced POV statements.Smith2006 (talk) 00:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I would leave the personal attacks to one side if I were you. Wikipedia policy points this out quite clearly. You criticise me for my atheism. Well, if you want to talk about each other, that's OK. You know, regarding your belief in god, my sister had an imaginary friend too, when she was 6 or 7 years old. She used to talk to her every day. Never got any answer though, so, she grew out of it. You will too, in time. When you're a bit older, I guess.

Regarding the matter in hand, I'll have a look at the article in the next day or two. My extensive knowledge of German (despite your bizarre, unwarranted, ill-informed and entirely incorrect criticism of my linguistic knowledge in that area) may offer you some comfort in your POV/god's work stuff. There is, you see, some evidence that Schindler was a good Catholic as you say. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Just for the record, the German news weekly "Der Spiegel" carried this remark about Schinder: "Er wurde in einem bürgerlichen Haus katholisch erzogen, ohne selbst religiös zu sein." This would appear to support the statement by AlasdairGreen27 above. Of course, if one holds the view "once a Catholic, always a Catholic" and since there is no record of Schindler ever having explicitly renounced the faith of his (infant) baptism, he was, technically speaking, always a Catholic. On the other hand, one could argue "Catholic is as Catholic does" and "actions speak louder than words".

Schindler was a complex character, prone to well-documented excesses which are hard to reconcile with his being a 'religious' person, so perhaps you are both right in part: one the one hand he did not renounce the Catholic church; on the other, his actions show that he was not a conventionally religious man. Whatever, he was a great man, a giant of a man who stood up for human values against an inhuman regime. I wonder how he would have reacted to this 'discussion'. --TraceyR (talk) 21:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Tracey my friend, I agree with everything you have written. It seems to me that Schindler, like many people, was not a very religious person who probably kept some elements of the faith he was born into. Who knows. Only he himself could answer that. Smith2006, however, is a Nazi on a one-man mission to use Wikipedia to pursue his own ultra-Catholic, anti-Semitic POV, which he sees as god's work. God help us. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Schindler`s positive attitude towards Jews may have been caused by his minority status as an ethnic German in Czechoslovakia. Both were minorities and felt unprivileged after World War 1. He was a great womanizer and loved boozing. Maybe he just loved people. The vast majority of the Germans did know much about the Holocaust. Mind you it was war and no free press. But they certainly were biased against Jews with all those political and economic problems after the war. This is not meant as an excuse.--Wurzeln und Flügel (talk) 20:12, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Schindler and the German invasion of Poland

Honzula, what is the source for your recently added edit, "Then he continued with work for Abwehr, paving the way for the German agression [sic] against Poland"? Stating that Oskar Schindler was complicit with German military intelligence in the invasion of Poland on Sept. 1, 1939, requires a source, please. Until then, I'm removing this sentence. JGHowes 18:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Several Czech and Polish authors (and even one English) state this. This was one reason why he move to Ostrava - to be closer to polish borders. Some also says that he was entangled in the Gliwice incident, but it doesn't seems possible. I think, he just collected informations before the invasion. The source is the same: GRUNTOVÁ, Jitka, Legendy a fakta o Oskaru Schindlerovi, Naše vojsko, 2002. (2nd edition). I think, there is no better sourced book in the Schindler's topic. I will find the names of other books in few days.--217.197.144.218 08:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Well the source (book of Gruntová) is added. It is also credited, that also in the book of David M. Crowe nad even Emilie Schindler (Memories) the work against Poland is mentioned. I've read also reference to one book of Robin O'Neil, but I cannot find which one it should be... Well, back to the book of Gruntová: she cites the postwar protocol of two interrogated men - former driver of Abwehr in Ostrava and one informer of SD, they both mentioned Schindler among others who were working against Poland. In the book there is also photocy of two gestapo documents from summer 1940: Then somebody (may be the polish resistance) was misusing the Abwehr forms and envelopes - gestapo jailed one man, who admitted to stealing some papers from the house of Oscar Schindler in July 1939 by request of Polish intelligence service. Schindler then refused, that the stolen papers were the forms and envelopes of Abwehrstelle Breslau and claimed that stolen was only the "private letter" with the stamp of Wehrmachtarchiv and some jewelry of his wife... Very interesting is also the copy of document from July 1938, when Schindler was jailed by Czechoslovak police on betrayal: he admitted that he had (among others) to "observe the emigrants" - the people who came to Czechoslovakia when escape from Nazi Germany.--Honzula 13:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

• I don't read Polish and unless there's an English translation, that's not of much help as a reference in the English Wikipedia. I've edited the sentence per WP:REDFLAG JGHowes 01:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

For me it is quite difficult to get the english book such as Crowe's Oskar Schindler: The Untold Account of His Life or the english version of Emilie Schindler's memories. May be, you could check them?--Honzula 17:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Oskar Schindler and the Gleiwitz Incident. UK TV's Channel 4 aired a documentary titled "The Real Oskar Schindler". The programme claimed Oskar Schindler was the black marketeer who supplied the Polish military uniforms and identification papers, to those who took part in the attack on the Sender Gleiwitz radio station.

don't forget he was a Nazi (=member of NSDAP) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.164.225.88 (talk) 21:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

In name only; many businessmen joined the party purely for business reasons, in a quite dictatorial climate. It's quite obvious that Schindler neither believed in National Socialism nor furthered its goals. He put his own life at risk to thwart the murder of "his" Jews. HammerFilmFan (talk) 14:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC) HammerFilmFan

he alreagy was a member of the Sudentengerman Party long befor that. And that could not have been good for business within Czechoslovakia (befor the annexion of the Sudetenland by the German Reich).178.210.114.106 (talk) 18:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

The Gleiwitz incident was a Secret Service operation by Heydrich and Naujocks, from what I have read. They would not have used Schindler, I don't think. They would have used uniforms and papers from a (paid) deserter. Secret Service does not buy materials on the open market. 121.209.51.37 (talk) 03:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Please add!

I found this information the Wikipedia page about Brněnec, the Czech city where his the final factory was:

The area "was liberated on 10 May 1945, after the factory had been fully operational for seven months".

Although it didn't provide a source, this section of Schlinder's entry--after they moved to a new factory and the war ends--doesn't say anything about the end of the war, how long the factory operated, etc. It just jumps to Schindler leaving for Austria although no date is provided for that event either. I think, in this case, unsupported information is better that having this huge hole in the narrative of the article. 64.134.71.74 (talk) 19:03, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. The article is currently undergoing a major overhaul as prep for a Good Article nomination, and this section will get more content and sources added as the process continues. I am presently researching content on his three arrests and then will be moving on to the move to Brinnlitz and the remainder of the article. It's slow going because the main book I am using is poorly indexed and not in chronological order. Thanks for your interest. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:46, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Anyone reading the article as it stands will get the impression that Keneally and Spielberg were essentially faithful biographers at all points - on everything that could matter, anyway. There is no discussion of the differences between those narratives and the actual story of the 30s and 40s, even the grey areas where the story was likely touched up in retrospect, both by the survivors, by Schindler himself (who was only ever interviewed by Steinhouse, a guy who was very much in on his story) and by those who told these events later (including Keneally and Spielberg of course). I appreciate the effort but there's a running problem with this article over the years, many people really want it to confirm that the film was truthful on everything of any importance. Strausszek (talk) 13:24, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

For that to happen we need reliable sources that discuss areas where the film is not accurate. To be clear, the sources should be discussing the film specifically, not just implicitly contradicting what's shown. People looking for a list of inaccuracies in general might be better served by looking at IMDb. DonIago (talk) 15:48, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Kenneally's book and the movie made from it are fictionalised accounts, and as such they were not used as sources for the recent re-write of this article. The main sources used were the books by Crowe, Roberts, and Thompson. Analysis of where the film and book differed from real life (if any reliable sources covering these points exist) are better suited to the articles about the book and the film, not the Schindler biography page. User:Strausszek also posted comments on my user talk page; here's a link. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:38, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2014

I'd request that 'the instrument under which the Czech Sudetenland was annexed into Germany since 1 October.' be changed at the end to "from 1 October 1938' or similar. Just a tidying-up of the grammar. Hume's Pudding Bowl (talk) 20:56, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

 Done I went with "on 1 October". -- Diannaa (talk) 21:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Sources for number of Jews

1. Mietek Pemper obituary in the Telegraph: 1,200
2. David Crowe's book, page 284 says 1,000 Jews from his own factory plus as many as 450 from other factories
3. Thompson 2002, pp. 21–23.
4. Roberts 1996, pp. 72–73. -- Diannaa (talk) 11:52, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

False information

in fact the Germans did NOT move the prisoners westwards in 1944. The death camps in present eastern Poland were destroyed and abandoned in 1943, practically all Jews previously killed there in gas chambers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.43.133.131 (talk) 21:23, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Death marches of concentration camp victims are a well known historical fact. Heinrich Himmler made the decision on 17 June 1944 to begin clearing the easternmost camps, and organized evacuations through Department D of the SS-Wirtschafts-Verwaltungshauptamt. Prisoners who were not fit enough to travel were killed on the spot, and the remaining people were sent on foot or occasionally by rail to point further west. Longerich gives several examples of death marches, including 8,000 from Kaunas and 47,000 from Stutthof. Eventually in 1945 some 56,000 people were forced to march out of Auschwitz to points further west. Longerich estimates that there were 714,000 people in concentration camps at the start of 1945, and between 33-50% of them were sent on forced marches. Longerich, Peter (2010). Holocaust: The Nazi Persecution and Murder of the Jews. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. p. 414-418. ISBN 978-0-19-280436-5. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:32, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

The facts you are mentioning are correct, especially the deadly march from Auschwitz but this happened in 1945 not 44. The same for the march from Stutthof. I did not know the Kaunas part (1944). What is confusing for me is the wording "easternmost" which makes me think of Treblinka, Majdanek, Belzes or Sobibor. Those camps, located in estearn Poland, in 1944 were already destroyed. In the Oskar Schindler context, the Germans moved the remaining prisoners from Plaszow camp westwards to Auschwitz in fall 1944 thru January 1945 but it was somewhat exceptional. I do not know any other camps in southern Poland being evacuated in similar way in 1944. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.26.206.237 (talk) 17:43, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Treblinka, Sobibór, and Bełżec were all extermination camps, not concentration camps. They were dismantled and abandoned (Sobibór and Bełżec in 1943, Treblinka in 1944, shortly before the Red Army arrived). Our article on Majdanek says the camp was captured virtually intact in July 1944. Therefore I don't think an amendment to the prose in this article is warranted, but if you have a specific suggestion, I would be glad to hear it. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:57, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Two non-Jews on the list?

I just looked at the list which is at www.oskarschindler.com/list.htm and noticed two names which do not list their religion as Jewish. The list shows every person's religion and nearly all list "Ju." for Judische or Jewish. The name Willy Schlichting, lists his religion as "PSV" and the name Roger Michaud lists his religion as "Sch.". I don't know enough about German abbreviations but if someone does, this may be notable for inclusion in the article.--T1980 (talk) 22:28, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The PSV is the reason that he was in the camp, it isn't his religion, it indicates that he was a Criminal who had completed their sentence but were sent to the camp because he had been convicted in the past. If they had gone straight from Prison to the camps, it would have been BV. Sch is a fairly broad category "other" category, I think.Naraht (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Sch. is the abbreviation of Schutzhäftling, literally, protected prisoner, but really simply prisoner. Sch is often followed by one or two letters, e.g. Sch. P. (Polish prisoner) or Sch. P.J. (Polish Jewish prisoner). (Roger Michaud is my grand father) Annesomi (talk) 22:47, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2015

The last sentence in the last paragraph states "He died on 4 October 1974 in Hildesheim, Germany" when the rest of the article mentions several times he died on 9 October. Please change 4 October to 9 October. 99.244.58.10 (talk) 23:44, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Done Stickee (talk) 00:57, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Ethnic German?

"Ethnic"? When did academia decide to start this nonsense? He was German. Period. I'd delete it but one of the lurking Aspies would just put it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.111.186 (talk) 03:41, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

The term "Ethnic German" is the usual English translation of the German term Volksdeutsche. --Honzula (talk) 06:35, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Obviously, "Ethnic German" in this case means as opposed to Ashkenazi Jew. (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C045:4890:F809:DEAD:DEF8:1C8A (talk) 20:45, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

No. Volksdeutsche means the member of "German nation", regardless of the state where the person is living or the citizenship which possesses. From historical reasons, in Germany and other countries of Central-East Europe the affiliation to the "nation" is not related to the citizenship but rather to the language and "blood" (let say the "origin" or the race ). Therefore describing somebody as Volksdeutsche makes him part of great German nation no matter where this person is living. In this case, Schindler was born in Austrian, later was citizen of Czechoslovakia, but nobody describes him as Austrian, Czechoslovak or Czech, because he acted as the member of German nation, even before he became citizen of Nazi Germany in late 1938. --Honzula (talk) 14:29, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 February 2017

178.19.149.55 (talk) 15:39, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

j,.......................

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 15:58, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

The problem when you lock out editors you also lock in mistakes

The article currently says:

Schindler became a spy for the Abwehr, the intelligence service of Nazi Germany, in 1936.

No it wasn't. It was the military intelligence service of the Wehrmacht. The RHSA which oversaw the Sicherheitsdienst was the closest thing the Nazi's had to their own intelligence service.

You lock smart people out, to keep the bollocks locked in. Typical Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.186.209 (talk) 22:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Next time you see a problem in an article you can't edit, you can use {{edit semi-protected}} to request that another user make a change for you.

Also, the situation isn't as clear cut as the article makes it. The Abwehr and the Reich Main Security Office both served as intelligence services for Nazi Germany. It wasn't until 1938 that the Abwehr became part of the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht. Additionally, the RHSA didn't even exist in 1936. clpo13_(talk) 23:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

He was named Righteous Among the Nations by the Israeli government in 1963.

He was named Righteous Among the Nations by the Israeli government in 1993.80.251.112.205 (talk) 20:28, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes he was, and this point is covered in the article in the "After the war" section. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:27, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Oskar Schindler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303222313/http://www.gotoslawek.org/linki/FirstInternationalExpertMeetingOnWarCrimes.pdf to http://www.gotoslawek.org/linki/FirstInternationalExpertMeetingOnWarCrimes.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090506000632/http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/focus/antisemitism/voices/transcript/?content=20090226 to http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/focus/antisemitism/voices/transcript/?content=20090226

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:18, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Righteous Among the Nations - When?

The Yad Vashem website says a tree was planted in 1962, but he did not receive the title until 1993, during the production of the film, I presume. The text from the following URL is: "In 1962 a tree was planted in Schindler's honor in the Avenue of the Righteous at Yad Vashem. Oskar and Emilie Schindler were recognized as Righteous Among the Nations in 1993."

http://www.yadvashem.org/righteous/stories/schindler.html

However, this Wiki page says "in 1963 Schindler was named Righteous Among the Nations." This seems to be a contradiction. Can someone confirm if this is wrong, and then correct or rephrase?

Conflicting information on the date in these two links on the same website: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/oskar-schindler https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa31614

It seems he may have been invited to plant a tree in 1962, but not given the title until 1993. This may have led to confusion.

I can see on Google search that Crowe page 131 says he received the title in 1962 and travelled to Israel to receive the award at a banquet on May 2, 1962. The source in the article (Roberts) apparently says 1963 - I can check this tomorrow at the library. The Yad Vashem website says a tree was planted in Oskar and Emilie's honor in 1993. That's the year the film Schindler's List came out. Emilie was definitely not honored in the 1960s - I think Oskar may have been recognized twice, one on his own and again when his wife Emilie received the honor. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:31, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

According to David M. Crowe's Oskar Schindler: "On June 24, 1993 she [Emilie], along with Oskar, was declared a Righteous Among the Nations by Yad Vashem." (page 604). I think the confusion arises from the fact that he was nominated in 1962 (page 511) but that was never made official due to some controversies, discussed in detail in chapter 12 of Crowe's book. Apparently he was allowed to plant a carob tree on the Avenue of the Righteous on May 8 1962, however (page 528). I'll update the page accordingly. Linguistical (talk) 05:32, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you – I don't have access to Crowe any more and would have to bring it in on inter-library loan, so I appreciate your help. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk)

No problem! Crowe's a bit dry, but he's certainly the most comprehensive English-language source for this subject. Linguistical (talk) 17:12, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2019

In the second paragraph, change "Abwehr, intelligence service" to "Abwehr, military intelligence service". [Nazi Germany had several different spy agencies] 2603:9000:6912:5C00:7015:723A:CB2:C46F (talk) 22:46, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. Good suggestion — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:06, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2019

The last two sentences of the last paragraph of the introduction should be inverted. It breaks the flow to state the award he got after his death before stating that he died. In other words, in a chronological list of events, 1993 should come after 1974, not before. SimonGabriel (talk) 23:02, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

 Done - thanks for the suggestion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:00, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Website to Canonize Oskar Schindler

Sir or Madam: Would it be possible to add a link to a website that is promoting the Canonization of Oskar Schindler? It is www.SaintOskar.com. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:4FC0:B:7C38:1A71:1D5A:30E0 (talk) 06:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

No, sorry, Wikipedia does not exist for the purposes of promotion. — Diannaa (talk) 12:55, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2020

The external link to the US Holocaust museum is dead. Please change the link FROM http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/focus/schindler/ TO https://www.ushmm.org/collections/bibliography/oskar-schindler Fandingo (talk) 09:07, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

 Done DonIago (talk) 12:28, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2019

In the "After the war" section of the article, refer the last line of the 2nd last paragraph. It says "Schindler, along with Karl Plagge,[89] Georg Ferdinand Duckwitz,[90] Helmut Kleinicke,[91] and Hans Walz[92] are among the few Nazi Party members to be given this award. Other awards include the German Order of Merit (1966).[93]". A hyperlink needs to be added on "Hans Walz[92]" which needs to point to the following wiki-page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Walz R.K.G. 19:10, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for the suggestion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:26, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

In the "After the war" section of the article it says; "the only member of the Nazi Party to be honoured in this way" it should be changed to say "the only former member of the Nazi Party to be honoured in this way" he was certainly not a member of the nazi party when he died! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.90.232 (talk) 04:05, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I am on the fence about this suggestion, as the Nazi Party had ceased to exist by that point, but I have gone ahead and acted on your suggestion anyway. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 16:18, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Using names provided by Jewish Ghetto Police officer Marcel Goldberg, Göth's secretary Mietek Pemper compiled and typed the list of 1,200 Jews who travelled to Brünnlitz in October 1944.

But according to this recently published article from NYTimes (full text below), the list was typed by Mimi Reinhard.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/12/world/europe/mimi-reinhard-dead.html Mimi Reinhard, Who Typed Up Schindler’s List, Dies at 107 (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:EA:E703:42FC:12A:5842:E3C4:37FA (talk) 09:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

We've got four sources that contradict Reinhard's claim. So I don't see how we can include it.— Diannaa (talk) 15:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

--- Doesn't the fact that several versions were typed suggest that it could very likely have been done by more than one person, too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:3031:13:2281:1:2:32b2:3f8b (talk) 10:30, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Little grammar error?

Hello dear people (thank you very much for the article), in the "Legacy" chapter this sentence:

"Liam Neeson was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actor for his portrayal of Schindler,[102] which won seven Oscars, including Best Picture.[103]"

I think has a small grammatical error, I am guessing it means '...portrayal of Schindler, and the film won...'

it is for sure a very, very little thing, especially in the light of really important themes (like what the article talks about), but maybe s.o. of those able to edit here are interested in having a look anyway. 2A02:3031:13:2281:1:2:32B2:3F8B (talk) 10:22, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Fixed. Thank you for the suggestion. — Diannaa (talk) 12:56, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Nazi and humanitarian

How is it possiuble to be a humanitarian and a member of the Nazi Party at the same time? 171.23.6.193 (talk) 09:15, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

A guy can change his mind. Perhaps he joined the party and later decided their goals and activities were immoral and acted accordingly. — Diannaa (talk) 15:15, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Also, people can believe awful things, support awful actions, even do awful things themselves, and also do worthy and dangerous things at great risk and/or immediate cost to themselves. Individual character is more complicated than a one-dimensional axis running from Absolute Monster to Perfect Saint.

John Rabe was not only a member of the Nazi Party, but the (acting?) head of its Nanking branch. He seems to have genuinely believed in Hitler, and there's no real evidence that he drastically changed his views prior to the end of the war. He also played a major role, at serious risk to his own life and for no gain, in saving the lives of over 200,000 Chinese during the Massacre of Nanking. 2603:7081:7E3E:DB14:BED4:FEAC:ACEE:D5E6 (talk) 23:15, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Time

One part of the article mentions him being in a documentary in 1983 even though he died in 1974. Can someone please clarify this? 71.213.46.36 (talk) 20:04, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm assuming it's archival footage of him, or perhaps he's being quoted, but I agree that clarification is needed. DonIago (talk) 20:48, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

I can have a look at the book on Friday when I get back to the library. — Diannaa (talk) 21:00, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

The source says he is quoted as saying that. — Diannaa (talk) 21:17, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Clarity on amount paid back

Suggest to edit the following line from:

"In 1948 he presented a claim for reimbursement of his wartime expenses to the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, and received $15,000."

Recommend update to the above line to the following: " In 1948 he presented a claim for reimbursement of his wartime expenses to the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, and received $15,000 (equivalent to about $185,000 in 2023 adjusted for inflation).

I think it is more fair to always show the adjusted dollars for inflation as it can mistakenly seem he was paid a paltry sum in return to his over $1,000,000 spent protecting the lives of over 1,000 people at great risk to his own well-being. In truth, he was paid back a substantial amount of money which allowed him to continue trying to establish businesses in Argentina and again in Germany after the war and being denied entry into the U.S. due to his affiliation with the Nazi party. Eyes RT (talk) 17:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Only member of the Nazi Party who is buried on Mt. Zion

The article currently says: He is buried in Jerusalem on Mount Zion, the only member of the Nazi Party to be honoured in this way.

I recently pointed out that the ultimate source for this appears to be Thomas Keneally, but his original statement appears to have been different (it contained the important word "probably"). I don't have Keneally's book at hand, so I added a source that quoted him, and changed the article accordingly (in this edit). My edit was reverted, for understandable reasons (the source is a book review, not a scholarly article).

The online sources that I could find for the claim that Schindler was the only member of the Nazi Party on Mt. Zion ultimately lead back either to that book review, or directly to Keneally (example that links to the book review). They usually omit the word "probably". That's problematic, because their source doesn't actually make that claim.

Could someone please check the two references currently given (Steinhouse 1994; Thompson 2002, p. 25), to see if they provide additional sources, or also rely on Keneally? Could someone also have a look at what Keneally actually wrote in his book, and if he explains how he arrived at that conclusion? Renerpho (talk) 10:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Keneally does't mention that in his book, which I have right here. The source is this article. It says "As far as Thomas Keneally could discover" so I think we should re-add your word "possibly" but we don't actually need an additional citation since this one already covers your point. — Diannaa (talk) 11:39, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Good, thank you. "Possibly" (your word) and "probably" (my word) both work. Renerpho (talk) 15:34, 18 July 2023 (UTC)