Talk:1934 German head of state referendum

Was Hitler democratically elected?

Several of the first 10 sites Google presented when I searched deny that Hitler was democratically elected. For example:

1. Quora:
   • No, Hitler was not democratically elected. This is a disturbingly popular misconception that needs to be put to rest, badly. [1]
2. Huppi:
   • Myth: Democracy elected Hitler to power.
   • Fact: Hitler used backroom deals, not votes, to come to power. Huppi

Can we address these objections, in the current article? --Uncle Ed (talk) 16:01, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

This article is about a referendum on merging two offices, not an election. If you have reliable sources about the nature of the referendum, you are welcome to add them. I did some searching, but I can't find much to add. I have not found a source which suggests that the vote was a fraud. Most report the vote matter-of-factly. Heinrich August Winkler, Germany: The Long Road West, Volume II (1933–1990) (Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 39, says that the Nazis were displeased with the lower levels of support in 1934 as compared with the referendum of 1933. Srnec (talk) 20:05, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Markus Urban, "The Self-Staging of a Plebiscitary Dictatorship: The NS-Regime Between 'Uniformed Reichstag', Referendum and Reichsparteitag", in Ralph Jessen and Hedwig Richter (eds.), Voting for Hitler and Stalin: Elections Under 20th Century Dictatorships (Campus Verlag, 2011), p. 43, states: "large-scale electoral fraud does not seem to have occurred in the Third Reich" and "results that were more than 5 per cent less than those achieved the previous year [were] interpreted by the regime as well as by observers hostile to the regime as a failure". Srnec (talk) 01:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

OPening

Making bold the title is totally normal. Perhaps you would explain what you have against linking referendum? The opening just looked awful. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 06:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Actually, I think your changes made it look awful. Starting the article with "The German referendum, 1934 was..." is terrible. Number 57 08:36, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Citation style

Most refs in this article were WP:CS1, and I have changed the rest to match per WP:CITEVAR. However, there are a bunch of refs that are to different pages of the same book/journal/etc. (the best example being The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich). Therefore, I think that {{sfn}}s would make more sense in this article. Thoughts / objections? HouseBlaster^talk 23:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:1934 German referendum/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Elli (talk · contribs) 20:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Claiming this review; will work on it shortly. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Images

• File:Ja dem Fuehrer.jpg looks fine though I do not know the details of German copyright law.
• File:RGBL I 1934 S 0747.png is fine.
• File:1934 German referendum ballot (cropped).jpg is fine.
• Ideally we'd have a map of the results, similar to File:March 1933 German federal election by District.svg (but using the yes/no color scheme typical for referendums). But that isn't necessary for GA.

  Y I have put in a request at c:Commons:Graphic Lab/Map workshop#1934 Germany referendum results. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Overall no real problems here. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:23, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Background

Hitler's rise to power

• Shirer source checks out. Don't have access to McDonough or Beck.
• but Hindenburg retained the ability to dismiss Hitler the source doesn't exactly verify this? Technically it is assumed that the President may dismiss the Chancellor... is what I assume verifies this, but the way the article is written doesn't make that power seem nearly as concrete as the prose here. Would maybe do though Hindenburg technically retained the ability to dismiss Hitler.

   Done HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Elections in Nazi Germany

• Can't access most of the sources here so again accepting on good faith.

   Already done HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

The referendum

• Was there any legislative rubber-stamping of the referendum? Assuming this was called under the "Law concerning the Plebiscite", did the cabinet act, or was it just Hitler; if so, when?

  Zurcher says that On August 19, 1934, the cabinet availed itself, a second time, of its self-appointed authority to consult the people. Pollock has a translation of a letter Hitler wrote to his Minister of the Interior requesting that the cabinet do so. It would be WP:SYNTH to say that the cabinet exercised the power at Hitler's request, so I think the best path forward would be to just say the cabinet did so (citing Zurcher), and ditch the WP:PRIMARY source account. Does that work for you? HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

   Done HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

  Looks good; sorry for not replying to your comment here earlier. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:34, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Overall no major problems in this section, just a few things to clarify. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Conduct

• Is there a better source we can use for the wording than Shu?

   Done HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

• Although it gave Hitler the right to pass laws that were contrary to the constitution, it stated that the president's powers were to remain "undisturbed", which has long been interpreted to forbid any attempt to tamper with the presidency. might want to clarify that "it" is talking about the Enabling Act here. The way the book explains this (and the following sentence as well) are more clear; obviously we can't just copy them but I feel like this could use a bit of reworking.

   Done HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

No other issues here. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:28, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Results

Looks good, though I can't access the sources.

 Already done HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Lead and overall notes

• Probably want to mention the referendum's date of 19 August in the Conduct section.

   Done HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 20:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

• Maybe have an aftermath section? And perhaps some commentary on the result at the time from people who weren't Nazis.

  @Elli: I'll find some non-Nazi commentary, but I am not sure what would go in an aftermath section. There was not much which happened as a result of the referendum: it merely confirmed the status quo. Stuff certainly happened afterwards, but not because of the referendum. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 16:27, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

  @HouseBlaster: Maybe expand on that a bit? I'd move the reactions (both from Nazis and others) into a "Reactions and aftermath" section and spend a sentence or two explaining that the referendum confirmed the status quo. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:44, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

  @Elli: I have created/expanded a Reactions and aftermath section. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 21:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

  Looks good. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

@HouseBlaster: Once you address these comments I should be able to promote the article. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:44, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Nice job! Elli (talk | contribs) 23:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 18:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that opposition to Hitler in the 1934 German referendum was doubled from the one a year prior? Source: "Hitler endorsed by 9 to 1 in poll on his dictatorship, but opposition is doubled" by Frederick T. Birchall from the NYT.
• ALT1 ... that opposition to Hitler in the 1934 German referendum doubled compared to the one held the previous year? Source: "Hitler endorsed by 9 to 1 in poll on his dictatorship, but opposition is doubled" by Frederick T. Birchall from the NYT.
• ALT2 ... that opposition to Hitler in the 1934 German referendum doubled compared to the 1933 German referendum? Source: "Hitler endorsed by 9 to 1 in poll on his dictatorship, but opposition is doubled" by Frederick T. Birchall from the NYT.
• ALT3 ... that according to the official results, opposition to Hitler's agenda in the 1934 German referendum doubled compared to the 1933 German referendum? Source: "Hitler endorsed by 9 to 1 in poll on his dictatorship, but opposition is doubled" by Frederick T. Birchall from the NYT.
• ALT4 ... that in the 1934 German referendum some areas recorded more votes than there were eligible voters? Source: The Third Reich in Power by Richard J. Evans, p. 110.
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: This is my second DYK nomination, so please let me know if I did something wrong! (Also, I do not believe I am required to do a QPQ.)

Improved to Good Article status by HouseBlaster (talk). Self-nominated at 00:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/1934 German referendum; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• No QPQ required. Article is eligible. No copyvio, well sourced. Long enough. Hook is sourced and interesting, but I do find the wording "was doubled from the one a year prior" a bit awkward. Srnec (talk)

The hook fact appears to be absent from main body text. Gatoclass (talk) 03:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

The article says Overall support for the government was lower than in the referendum of 12 November 1933, when the government had received support from 95.1% of the total electorate. It has the 1934 results. You can clearly see that opposition must have doubled, since it could not have been more than 4.9% in 1933. Srnec (talk) 03:41, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

I have added two alts with (hopefully) less awkward phrasing, and have explicitly added the information to the text. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 04:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Okay, firstly, the hook fact must be in the article, not merely inferred. Readers should not be expected to do the math themselves. Apart from which - how would I know from those figures that "opposition ... doubled"? There might have been fewer overall voters the first time, or a much larger number of informal votes.

In any case, comparing the two referenda looks like an apples to oranges thing to me, as they were on very different subjects. So it seems a little misleading, if not WP:SYNTHish, to characterize the result as "opposition to Hitler" specifically. Gatoclass (talk) 04:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm good with HouseBlaster's additions and, on reflection, the source supports the hook, so let's not waste any more time on this one. Gatoclass (talk) 04:33, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

For clarity, my preference would be for ALT2—does that work for you? HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 03:24, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Sure, why not? Gatoclass (talk) 05:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

• The way these hooks are worded wrongly suggest that the referendum results reflect actual opposition to Hitler, or at least the actual votes cast (when there was widespread fraud). I think it would be better to write something like, "that twice as many oppose votes were recorded ... ?" (t · c) buidhe 09:40, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

  Does ALT3 work for you? HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 15:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

  Perhaps take the hook in an entirely different direction? There is clearly too much ambiguity in the word "double", since Buidhe takes it to mean "twice as many oppose votes were recorded" when percentages are actually in view. Srnec (talk) 00:29, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

  ALT4 added. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 01:30, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

AGF verified ALT4; other hooks struck for clarity. Gatoclass (talk) 04:30, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:1933 German referendum which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)