Talk:Wannsee Conference

As promised I have rewritten this article and archived all this rather silly and irrelevant talk. Any attempt to add revisionist nonsense to this article will be reverted. Adam 13:33, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying you will revert only material which is patently "nonsense", or are you saying you will deem any material associated with revisionism automatically to be "nonsense"? Wulfilia 08:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will judge all edits on their merits. Nonsense of any type will be reverted. Adam 08:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will you consider material to be nonsense merely because it is associated with revisionism? Wulfilia 04:07, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity - after reading the lead statement ( Adam rewriting and silly stuff ) I checked out the original wiki article ( 2002 ). It was full of it but was actually a far superior product. How did it get so long and so full of it - dare I guess at the author's identity, silly me.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 159 109 80 63 (talk • contribs)

To plan or to inform?

I question the accuracy of the opening remark: "The purpose of the conference was to plan the 'Final solution...'" I guess it depends on exactly what is meant by "plan", but it sounds as if the main issue was open before the conference and decided during it. This contradicts the more accurate statement later in the article: "It thus became necessary to bring together representatives of all the relevant departments to explain to them what was intended and how it was to be carried out, and to make it clear that this undertaking was done on the highest authority of the Reich and could not be resisted." In other words the main purpose was to inform not to plan, and no important decisions were made. I propose changing "plan" to "inform senior Nazi's of plans for", but there are other options. --Zero^talk 12:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's a fair comment. The main purpose of the conference, as revealed in the minutes, was to clarify that Jews and half-Jews (with some exceptions) would be deported to the East - anyone who refuses to believe that this means to Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, Chelmno, Maidenek or Belsec has his head in the sand - and that the SS would be in charge of the operation. It is clear that the intent, as shown in the document signed by Goering and quoted at the conference by Heydrich, was to notify all relevant departments of the plans alrady formulated by the SS. It is assumed that there was a verbal directive from Hitler, which has not been definitively attested to, although the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming.--Anthony.bradbury 18:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that is a better wording. Adam 03:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

90 minutes is an informational meeting at best. Using Eichmann's testimony, from many years later - when he was trying to not get hung, as valuable intrepretative information shows how uninformative the Wannsee document is. One of the opening qoutes attributed to Hitler - "looking sideways" - from some notes by Goring. Any citation as to where to read the original? The citation given may have the quote but finding it in the maze is virtually impossible.

Rank

I have made a minor edit. Heydrich was, at the time of receipt of the directive from Goering, only a Gruppenfuhrer. He was promoted to Obergruppenfuhrer on 27 9 41.--Anthony.bradbury 21:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted all unsigned / anonymous commentary on this page and will continue to do so. This is a page for serious discussion of a serious topic by serious people, not a playground for neo-Nazi crackpots. Adam 03:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attendees

I have added a few words to the first now paragraph, to clarify that not all attenders were confirmed Nazis. Kritzinger certainly was not, and possibly Neumann.--Anthony.bradbury 17:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do you define "not a Nazi"? Adam 09:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]