Talk:Gott mit uns
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gott mit uns article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does this have anything to do with neopaganism?
Lead
edit"phrase commonly associated", you sure? Gott mit uns is used in Germany/German language in several occasions (in my OR), houses are sometimes marked with this phrase etc. Sebastian scha. (talk) 13:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Unconvincing Citation
editWhere it talks about the "Wehrmacht soldiers" belt buckle, the citation provided only says "soldier", not "Wehrmacht", and as such, is not a valid citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.82.67 (talk) 02:47, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Do you even know what Wehrmacht means?--2620:112:D000:61FF:1E4B:D6FF:FE73:EA24 (talk) 20:19, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
"ultimately tracing back to the Hebrew term Immanuel from the Bible"
editThis claim from the lede does not appear to be supported by anything. If there are no objections, I will remove it (unless someone beats me to it). JayHubie (talk) 03:02, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Requested move 9 September 2023
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
It was proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.
result: Move logs: source title · target title
This is template {{subst:Requested move/end}} |
– Article already covers Hebrew, Latin, and Swedish usage of the phrase instead of just German, and should also be expanded to cover the Russian "Съ нами Богъ", all of which would make much more sense under the English translation rather than just a copypaste of the original German Orchastrattor (talk) 19:21, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Military history has been notified of this discussion. HouseBlastertalk 00:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Note: pages with content, such as God with us, are ineligible to be proposed titles in move requests unless they, too, are formally dispositioned. "God with us → God with us (disambiguation)" has been added to this request to meet that requirement. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 01:16, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. The primary meaning of "God with us" is Immanuel. —Srnec (talk) 19:12, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. The article seems almost entirely focused on the German usage. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:19, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- That can still be the case, the issue is that there are selfevidently a number of other equivalents of the same phrase in other languages that are significant enough to be covered on WP but not enough to carry a high-quality article on their own, examples like the Latin and Russian phrases would simply have nowhere to go but here.Orchastrattor (talk) 22:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Logic in Sentence + Citation?
editIn the following sentence:
"For ideological reasons, however, this motto was not used in the East German armed forces, as the Nationale Volksarmee did not shy away from Prussian military traditions."
my understanding from reading this article is that the motto is, in fact, a Prussian military tradition. This sentence therefore would seem contradictory as one who does not shy away from Prussian traditions would indeed use this motto.
Also would like a source for this. 64.238.189.139 (talk) 16:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Idk if it is still contradictory or just become "pseudocontradictory", because if someone wouldn't shy away from Prussian military tradiction so this person would use this motto and not the opposite, that makes me think if that people probably are a minority, or just a relative share (neither big, nor small) group. 177.105.90.75 (talk) 16:02, 27 June 2024 (UTC)