Talk:Heinrich Himmler

"In this capacity, he took part in the genocide"

I don't think it's accurate to say Himmler "took part in the genocide" when he personally did not kill anybody. I changed it to say he "played a major role in the genocide" but was reverted. Which wording to people think is better? Discussion welcome. — Diannaa (talk) 23:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Ordering or coordinating it is taking part in an essential way. (Hohum ^@) 23:16, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

If we’re going to be sticklers for semantics, I recommend to have the sentence read Himmler “took part in orchestrating the genocide”. I think we should avoid any language that potentially plays down his role in the Holocaust. Emiya1980 (talk) 23:20, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Fair point. (Hohum ^@) 23:57, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Its important to be factually accurate. No one wants to downplay someone who was an architect of terror/murder/death. I would recommend: Himmler’s SS was the organisation most responsible for the genocidal murder of an estimated 5.5 to 6 million Jews and the deaths of millions of other victims during the Holocaust. He was not the only one and the SS was not the only group, unit or organisation involved. Kierzek (talk) 00:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

As I indicated to you earlier, that sentence is needlessly verbose. Moreover, this article is about Himmler himself, not the SS. The focus of the lede should be centered around him. Emiya1980 (talk) 00:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

It’s accurate. And you cannot separate one from the other. Kierzek (talk) 00:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

There is nothing inaccurate about saying Himmler took part in orchestrating the Holocaust. It is just a more concise way of conveying the same meaning of what you're trying to say. Additionally, if we frame the sentence your way, “Himmler” and some form of the phrase "was responsible" would appear two sentences in a row which is needlessly repetitive.Stop trying to use this thread to shoehorn your verbosity back in the lede. Emiya1980 (talk) 00:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

If the sentence read “he and his SS took part in orchestrating the genocide”, would you find that an acceptable compromise?Emiya1980 (talk) 00:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

I think that is a bit awkward. The version we had when we passed GA was "As facilitator and overseer of the concentration camps, Himmler directed the killing of some six million Jews, between 200,000 and 500,000 Romani people, and other victims; the total number of civilians killed by the regime is estimated at eleven to fourteen million people."

We could use that as a starting point; perhaps go with "In this capacity, Himmler directed the genocide of an estimated 5.5–6 million Jews as well as the deaths of millions of other victims during the Holocaust." (The total number of deaths is already covered later in the paragraph.) — Diannaa (talk) 01:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

As long as you replaced “Himmler” with “he” for reasons already mentioned and included the word “mass” alongside “killing”, I would not have an issue with the sentence as set forth in the second paragraph of your post. Emiya1980 (talk) 01:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

? My suggestion doesn't use the word "killing" — Diannaa (talk) 01:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

My mistake. I've crossed out what I said with regards to "mass killing". Emiya1980 (talk) 01:30, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) And it took you six edits. Also @ Kierzek, this suggestion does not incorporate the fact that other groups besides the SS (the Wehrmacht for example) were involved in mass killings of civilians. But I don't see how we can incorporate that without the sentence getting too awkward or long. It's a bit off-topic here as well IMO. Would you be OK with that being left out? — Diannaa (talk) 01:41, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

If we said Himmler "took part in orchestrating the genocide", that wouldn't be an issue. However, I get the impression neither of you like that. Emiya1980 (talk) 01:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

I believe we need to clearly emphasize the fact he was the main director of policy and main conduit (through the SS) of the murder and deaths that occurred; not just “took part”. I agree to your suggested wording, Diannaa and Emiya1980, to changing “Himmler” to “he” in the sentence. I await further input from others herein. Kierzek (talk) 02:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Kierzek's description is entirely correct. Himmler was a major perpetrator by being in charge of the SS—the single organization most responsible for the implementation of the Final Solution—and while one could argue signing authorizations or issuing orders is participation, it is not the same thing as "taking part" in an execution. For those of you who've read about Himmler, you know he had a weak constitution and no stomach for the violence himself. Stating he played a "major role in the Holocaust" is more than sufficient. One of the reasons that "orchestrating the genocide" is not necessarily appropriate either is that he left nearly all of that to subordinates like Eichmann, Pohl, Globocnik, and a host of other ghastly figures. --Obenritter (talk) 19:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

So you would prefer "played a major role" rather than "directed", if I am understanding you correctly. — Diannaa (talk) 20:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

How about we rephrase "a major role" as "a central role"? That would better reflect the lede paragraph's characterization of him as one of the "main architect[s]" of the Holocaust. Emiya1980 (talk) 00:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I prefer the word “central” over “major”, but in the end would agree to the latter word if that is consensus. To me “central” means main or predominant, being at the center of something. “Major” being more important or significant. Both would describe Himmler, but we should use one word here. Kierzek (talk) 15:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Central role would work nicely given his place in the hierarchy.--Obenritter (talk) 22:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

@Diannaa: Do you have any objections to saying Himmler had a "central" as opposed to a "major" role in the Holocaust?Emiya1980 (talk) 23:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

No objections. — Diannaa (talk) 13:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I have implemented this change. — Diannaa (talk) 13:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Himmler's corpse

While the body of Himmler was buried near Lüneburg if that grave was found it would not contain Himmler's body. Himmler's body was cremated after a second autopsy at the Hannover Military Hospital, there is ample evidence that this happened, you just have to look. There is even doubt over whether it was Himmler or a double 175.39.57.180 (talk) 09:37, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 October 2024

In this introduction sentence:

He is primarily known for being one of the main architects behind the Holocaust.

please replace "behind" with "of". It sounds bizarre to say that someone was an "architect behind" anything, whether literally for buildings, or figuratively for anything else. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 22:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done I agree, "behind" reads awkwardly there. But the whole sentence could afford to be reworded for flow if anyone has any suggestions. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

"Great Britain"

It is an island, not a country. Grassynoel (talk) 03:16, 10 November 2024 (UTC)