Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hi! I started this article and I really like the way it is being fleshed out. I wonder, though, whether we should take some of the material here and put it into a separate article on the Reichstag fire and have this article focus more on van der Lubbe the person. What does everyone think? Danny 21:54 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)
Not a bad idea. BTW, I don't like the reference to 'half-wit'. I also saw that Paul Mattick dedicated one of his books to M. v. d. Lubbe. There was also an article on him in an old copy of the UK magazine "Anarchy" (2nd series from the early 70s).
I cleaned up the most recent addition by an anonymous user and removed: "The travel diary of Rinus had been published in many languages (dutch, german, french,...)" since I could find no reference whatsoever for this.
It mentions he was beheaded following a trial. What was the crime? Was it the Reichstag fire? If so, add this, and a link. --Rebroad 09:42, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
hello, although many think it was marinus van der lubbe that started the fire was it organised by him, the communists, or the nazis themselves to gain control, there is a lot of evidence that leads to the belief the the nazis were behind these such evidence as karl ernst head of the SA in Berlin was asked if his storm troopers were behind the fire he answered ' If i said Yes, I'd be a bloody fool, If i said no I'd be a bloody liar.' evidence like this leads historians to believe the nazis tho be behind the reichstag fire.
"In short he seems to have been suffering from a mental disorder that led him to seek both fame and the role of victim."
This seems to me to be a judgmental statement solely designed to advance the theory that the Nazis were really behind the Reichstag fire. It doesn't seem necessary to me, we should just present the facts and let the reader decide.
There's an odd double-mention of his joining the Dutch Communist Party (CPH). Is the second reference meant to be to the German Communist Party (KPD)? OlYeller 21:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
The overall tone of the article makes it sound like an opinion piece rather than an objective statement of what are believed to be facts. In particular, the use of the word "forced" immediately puts the subject of the article into the role of a bystander or victim. Based upon this discussion [thread] and references to this individual by conspiracy theorists, the conclusion I draw is that this is a subjective piece meant to emotionally predispose me to believe that he was a hapless victim/patsy, rather than an objective piece meant to convey information. That subjectivity leads me to question the entire article. -- added by IP User 68.99.134.118, 18:35, 14 June 2007
There are, or there is, people insisting in saying Marinus was Jewish. It'd would be nice to see this page protected for some time. Please, do this! 201.19.24.164 03:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
It is said that Lubbe's eye-sight was damaged, but it is not clear how this occured. More than one explanation has been given. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.28.111 (talk) 15:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
The source speaks of a trial taking place after van der Lubbe declared himself to be one of the ringleaders of the strike at the Tielmann factory. It equally sais that he wished to take full responsibility for the trial, yet it dose'nt say the outcome. I am intrigued as to what the outcome is? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Godwin69 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
There's no substantive evidence whatsoever for the allegation that Van der Lubbe was "a pawn of the Gestapo", "assisted by the SA" and similar stuff. The book by Bahar/Kugel is full of CT nonsense and has completely flopped in Germany. No need to introduce it here as a prime source. Sulpiz Delhaye (talk) 23:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I notice your use of unacceptable language such as "trashing": that indicates to me your POV pushing. I also notice that you don't have a talk page. Have you actually seen the book: if noy I suggest that you desist your attacks. Peterlewis (talk) 11:11, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps he was mentally unstable? He was briefly mentioned in A. M. Merloo's work Rape of the Mind:
The opening paragraph says, "He was posthumously acquitted in 2008," and cites (and in the reference quotes at length from) this article in The Guardian. However, the quote and the article indicate that he was pardoned, not acquitted. So I'm going to change "acquitted" to "pardoned" in the opening paragraph. NCdave (talk) 03:08, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone, please, tell me the deeper sense or meaning of pardoning somebody, who was already executed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.134.104.5 (talk) 13:05, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
The article makes a great deal of factual claims and interpretations of facts that cry out for better sourcing. patsw (talk) 01:40, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
"The forensic evidence from the scene, a set of photographs taken by the Berlin police department, shows many small fires started by van der Lubbe after he entered the building, apparently using fire-lighters."
"All of the examples of fires he set, such as one near the window on the ground floor where it is alleged he entered, self-extinguished."
I'm sure the word SUPPOSEDLY is missing from these two sentences? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.10.46.8 (talk) 12:12, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
German communists slandered him as gay.--95.114.109.246 (talk) 17:06, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be something about the disastrous political result of the fire? Whoever started it, it gave the Nazis an excuse to crack down on their opponents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.155.133 (talk) 08:21, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Van der Lubbe COULD have started the fire (but so COULD nearly anyone else at the time): BUT this is a fact that is IRRELEVANT to the point that the Nazis used Van der Lubbe as alleged author of the fire to force the Nazi Revolution. Assume Van der Lubbe started the fire: his motive might have been that he wanted to see the Nazis blamed for it because the Nazis took advantage of the Reichstag fire to force their Nazi Revolution. Assume Van der Lubber did NOT start the fire: his motive might have been that he did not want the Nazis blaming the Communists, such as himself, for starting the fire. But the Nazis, in point of fact, took advantage of the Reichstag fire to force the Nazi Revolution. Result in either case: THE NAZIS TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE REICHSTAG FIRE TO FORCE THE NAZI REVOLUTION. Cui bono? drshaw1946@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drshaw1946 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Can we get a new citation in there to establish the facts of Lubbe's biography? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.253.48.119 (talk) 01:56, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Marinus van der Lubbe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:18, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Marinus van der Lubbe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:15, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
The image which purportedly shows the window used by Van der Lubbe to enter the building has writing on it: Von Feuerweher zertrümmerte Scheibe which translates to "Window broken by firemen". This goes against the claim of Van der Lubbe breaking it to enter the building. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.10.110.8 (talk) 12:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
IT WAS ALL A NAZI FALSE FLAG. 2A00:23C7:5882:8201:E088:81BB:597B:FBA2 (talk) 18:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
This guy is clearly Magnus Carlsen 2A00:23C4:6B13:D801:5104:3CE2:50F8:B04C (talk) 01:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.