Talk:Richard Böck

Latest comment: 6 years ago by 105.0.2.253 in topic I Believe Him

I Believe Him edit

Just to clarify, I completely believe the story of Richard Böch. There has been a lot of talk in recent years, though, about whether or not he was actually there or heard the story from someone else. I think the article should definitely reflect that. -OberRanks (talk) 20:09, 8 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Indeed, just that there isn't really open debate on that subject. What's the source of Richard Boeck being made a "honorary Auschwitz survivor"? --105.0.2.253 (talk) 15:49, 21 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Spelling of name edit

I think the real spelling ist Richard Böck not with an "h". --41.151.208.245 (talk) 13:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

That is correct. Furthermore, his friend's name was Karl *Hölblinger*, which also should clear up any confusion as to who he was referring to in his testimony. Both Böck's and Hölblinger's testimony can be found on the Fritz Bauer Institut's website: http://www.auschwitz-prozess.de/ Note that this was testimony taken in a criminal trial of Auschwitz personnel and thus should be considered adequately documented and reliable.
I believe that the names should be corrected, the "validity" section removed - since it rests on the confusion about Hölblinger's name and the rest is speculation - and the article renamed. However, I don't know how to do the latter. 178.3.129.69 (talk) 20:28, 18 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
The name is indeed Richard Böck with a k. Therefore also the spelling in the OGG file is completely wrong. That can be proofed by audio recordings of the Auschwitz process in 1965, where the judge is calling him several times as "Herr Böck" and I can proof it too, because I am working for his grandchild with the same family name Böck. Now who will change the entry now resp. how can the title of an entry be changed? Kunstguerilla (talk) 12:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Thanks to everyone above for the great research into this. "World at War" reported his name wrong and as such the article is very inaccurate. It should pretty much be rewritten and re-done. I take back all the bad things I said about red anon ips behind their backs - since we owe a lot to the ip who discovered the correct name spelling. -OberRanks (talk) 19:59, 10 March 2015 (UTC)Reply