Talk:Nuremberg trials

(Redirected from Talk:Nuremberg Trials)
Latest comment: 7 months ago by Buidhe in topic Merge proposal
Featured articleNuremberg trials is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 23, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
March 22, 2022Good article nomineeListed
August 9, 2022Featured article candidateNot promoted
August 9, 2023Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 20, 2005, November 20, 2006, November 20, 2007, November 20, 2008, November 20, 2013, November 20, 2015, and November 20, 2023.
Current status: Featured article

Sources

edit

https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa1046045 https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/pa1173344 https://twitter.com/FranHirsch/status/1443925053888995358 https://global.oup.com/academic/product/perspectives-on-the-nuremberg-trial-9780199232338?lang=en&cc=us#

  • Bloxham, Donald (2001). Genocide on Trial: War Crimes Trials and the Formation of Holocaust History and Memory. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-820872-3.
  • Salter, Michael (2007). Nazi War Crimes, US Intelligence and Selective Prosecution at Nuremberg: Controversies Regarding the Role of the Office of Strategic Services. Routledge-Cavendish. ISBN 978-1-904385-81-3.
  • Mouralis, Guillaume (2019). "Retrouver les victimes. Naufragés et rescapés au procès de Nuremberg". Droit et société. 102 (2): 243. doi:10.3917/drs1.102.0243.
  • Nowak-Korcz, Paulina (2021). "Le génocide des nazis dans les témoignages des interprètes et traducteurs au procès de Nuremberg". International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique. doi:10.1007/s11196-021-09834-w.
  • Burchard, Christoph (2006). "The Nuremberg Trial and its Impact on Germany". Journal of International Criminal Justice. 4 (4): 800–829. doi:10.1093/jicj/mql052.
  • Jockusch, Laura (2012). "Justice at Nuremberg? Jewish Responses to Nazi War-Crime Trials in Allied-Occupied Germany". Jewish Social Studies. 19 (1): 107–147. doi:10.2979/jewisocistud.19.1.107.
  • Bloxham, Donald (2013). "From the International Military Tribunal to the Subsequent Nuremberg Proceedings: The American Confrontation with Nazi Criminality Revisited: International Military Tribunal". History. 98 (332): 567–591. doi:10.1111/1468-229X.12024.
  • [1]
No access
  • Pratt, Valéry (2018). Nuremberg, les droits de l'homme, le cosmopolitisme: pour une philosophie du droit international (in French). Le Bord de l'eau. ISBN 978-2-35687-400-9.
  • Seliger, Hubert (2016). Politische Anwälte?: die Verteidiger der Nürnberger Prozesse (in German). Nomos. ISBN 978-3-8487-2360-7.
  • Tisseron, Antonin (2014). La France et le procès de Nuremberg: inventer le droit international (in French). Prairies ordinaires. ISBN 978-2-35096-095-1.

Light pro-defendant bias?

edit

I dont think this is near obvious or major enough to warrant a tag in the article, and Im certainly not an experienced enough editor to make a full claim of bias here, but while reading the section on the prosecutions and defences I couldnt help but feel like their structure and wording lightly (that is to say, quite subtly) favors the defence and guides the reader towards believing the defence was treated unfairly. I was hoping a more experienced editor could take a look and give their thoughts. Googleguy007 (talk) 12:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Googleguy007 specifically what in the article is leading you to this conclusion? (t · c) buidhe 13:08, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Date of the British prosecution's opening speech

edit

The article states that Hartley Shawcross gave an opening speech on the 12th of December: "The British prosecution covered the charge of crimes against peace, [...] On 12 December, Shawcross gave the opening speech..." in the 'American and British Prosecution' section of 'Course of the trial'. However, the Avalon Project's transcript of the trials (linked in the article itself) lists Shawcross's speech as having taken place on the 4th of December instead (https://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/imtproc_v3menu.asp). At least one other source found online supports this date (the webpage of Rober H. Jackson Center - https://www.roberthjackson.org/nuremberg-event/british-opening-statement-2/). As the other dates in the article appear to line up with Avalon Project, this may be a mistake caused by the fact that 4th of December was the twelfth day of the trials. Jko.366 (talk) 01:24, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Merge proposal

edit

I propose merging Subsequent Nuremburg Trials into Nuremburg trials. I think that since most of the content of the quite short Subsequent Nuremberg Trials article already exists under the heading: "Subsequent Nuremberg Trials" in the article of Nuremberg Trials, a merge would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Nuremberg Trials, and would in fact enhance the main article, which is notably more popular between the two. ShoBDin (talk) 15:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Oppose adding more content about the subsequent trials to this article would be UNDUE. (t · c) buidhe 17:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Reply