Talk:Altes Stadthaus, Berlin

Article name

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.

---

Looking at the confusion about buildings with similar names - Altes Stadthaus, Altes Rathaus - which result in ambiguous translations (Old City Administration Building, Old City Hall), I suggest to make the original names the article titles, to avoid confusion (which translation means which building?) and misleading (is it an old city, or an old administration or an old building?) The article Mitte (locality) - another questionable article name! - has the names in German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:56, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I think we're stuck now. It has been established that the (American) English term is used for the Rotes Rathaus - Red City Hall - and all other Rathäuser that I'm aware of (unless there are articles on some in smaller settlements where "town hall" has been used; it should perhaps be noted that British English uses "town hall" regardless of the size of the settlement). Confronted with the problem of the word Stadthaus that needs to be distinguished in many cases, as in that of Berlin, I checked de.wiktionary and found no guidance - only "town house," which is another meaning of the term but not its meaning here - and I also checked the de.wikipedia DAB page to see whether any other Stadthaus articles had interwikis to en., and found none that did. I agree with those who chose to use "City Hall" for "Rathaus" articles that it would be meaningless to readers who don't know German to use "Rathaus", and that goes double for "Stadthaus," which is a common term in German with no exact parallel in English and a "false friend" with "townhouse" (worsened by the fact that in American English that has become the real estate and planning term for an attached house). I agree with the wisdom of having a redirect for those who do search on the German term, but we cannot make teaching German part of our mission. I think "city administration building" is clear enough and close enough (although if anyone can suggest another solution I haven't thought of, perhaps one already in use on en.wikipedia, that would be great), and for native English speakers I don't think the "old" is misleading (any more than in "old city hall"). The ideal would have been a hatnote - those are very useful for clarifying what a title refers to. But the article on Berlin's old "city hall" (Altes Rathaus) hasn't been written yet, so for now I put an informational note as early in the article as I could. (I suspect the original creator of this article was confused about its not being a Rathaus. After all, it looks like one! But that goes to show that the distinction between the two German terms goes over the head of an English-speaking reader.) Yngvadottir (talk) 14:59, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

You are right. But (of course, had to come): whatever the meaning, the topic should be found. Never ever would I look up "Old administration ...", searching for "Altes Stadthaus", as I find it on maps and in the article of the neighbourhood. My point of view: if a thing has a name, take it, even if it doesn't fit. - The construction "Old City Administration Building" is almost as (you name it) as "zusammengesetzte Hauptwörter", "city administration" for a simple "Rat" (council) seems awkward. - If I read "Altes Stadthaus" I know the house is old, not the city, because "Stadt-" qualifies the "-haus". What is old in "Old City Administration Building" I would not know ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, English is a crazy language. I'm glad someone had already made a redirect from the German name, and I hope I or someone else does the actual Old City Hall soon so that both terms and both German names can all be fitted together correctly. (In the meantime, not on name - what do you think I still need to find a reference for? I'm reluctant to comment out any more of the article, but may have to - the books are simply not visible to me.) Yngvadottir (talk) 16:01, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I think we should not invent a name here, we should rely on reliable sources ;) - I "googled" "Old City Administration Building, Berlin" and got only (!) several (!) Wikipedia-related entries. I googled "Altes Stadthaus, Berlin" and found many entries, many in English! I hope this will be moved. I don't want to do it myself but would formally request a move otherwise, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:00, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

In addition: the lead says (bold by me) "Originally called the "New City Administration Building", after World War II it became the seat of the Council of Ministers of the GDR and a neighboring building became the administration building for East Berlin. This other building was therefore called the "New City Administration Building" and to avoid confusion, the former one has since been known as the "Old City Administration Building"." I would like to see a source for this. In the article it says "and became known as the "New City Administration Building"." with a source given, "Hauser, Hans (2000)", in German. It doesn't support the claim. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

It's there on p. 63 of that source, as stated in the ref. This para: "Das 1902 bis 1911 nach Plänen des Berliner Stadtbaumeisters Ludwig Hoffmann als Vierflügelanlage auf leicht trapezförmigem Grundriß zwischen Jüdenstraße, Parochialstraße, Klosterstraße und Stralauer Straße errichtete Alte Stadthaus trägt diesen Namen, um es vom benachbarten, zwischen 1936 und 1938 errichteten und 1945 als Sitz des ersten Nachkriegsmagistrats so benanntem Neuen Stadthaus zu unterscheiden."

I see the list of things the reviewer wants referenced, but now I must sleep :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:20, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Sleep, and then see more clearly what I mean: "... Alte Stadthaus trägt diesen Namen ..." (carries the name Altes Stadthaus), not "... Old Administrative ...". I don't see any source that this translation is used anywhere but in this article. That doesn't translate for me to "has been known as the Old City Administration Building". It has not been known under that name. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I'd say great work on everything but the name; we seem to have Palazzo this and that and Gemäldegalerie, Berlin (though this may soon be a misnomer as Raphael makes way for the new [1]); also the street names in the article aren't being translated and we even have some kind of mussel-calc; I think the average reader choosing to peruse however many k this is of prose would accept the German and/or know at least this much (or soon would); having to match a translated name to the original can be jarring; you say it's not part of the mission to extend vocabulary, that seems a shame; and as per the user one above, is the building known under such a name? Plus the ambiguity. And then it's so drab, where's the continental flavour? And... And... Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 23:47, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

"City Administration Building" is the best translation I can come up with for Stadthaus. As I said above, I found no precedent for treating this term on en.wikipedia, but it has to be contrasted with Rathaus (and leave a clear space for Berlin's Altes Rathaus to be added when an article on that gets created; or for that matter for old city halls in other German-speaking cities). I therefore do not think the translation needs a ref, and I note that we frequently pick one translation out of many possibles (for example I expected Council of State for the East German Staatsrat from a source I had just been reading, but found it at State Council of the German Democratic Republic.) It's possible though to use both German and English in the passage you have highlighted, Gerda: something like: "The building was originally known as the New City Administration Building (Neues Stadthaus) but ... and has since been known as the Old Administration Building (Altes Stadthaus) to distinguish it." It's always a balancing act providing clarity and comprehensibility for those who can't read the foreign language in question; the creator of this article missed the distinction between Rathaus and Stadthaus and most English-speaking readers will; while being accurate, and English Wikipedia has generally gone for translated names even where there is no common English usage, and relied on redirects to assist those coming from the German name or term. I didn't find a discussion of this building in the books I consulted on the accommodation of government in Berlin post-1945 and post-reunification, or on the "new Berlin". Partly because, I'm afraid, there's not much Continental flair to Berlin government :-) I see that the same editor has now started the article on Hoffmann in userspace (using the Russian article). And the referencing system used in this article, whose complexity already added hours to my re-referencing here, has been further refined so that I'm no longer sure what's where and what a reference is called. I think I've provided enough references to use to reference the vast majority of things the DYK reviewer has marked as needing refs, although they will have to be examined by whoever does it. Others can be commented out; for example, of the paragraph about housing being a priority after the war, that is the only important point and can be placed in an adjacent paragraph and if a reference is needed for so obvious a point concerning Berlin in 1945–46, one can easily be found and the rest of the paragraph removed or commented out. I think I still deserve a credit if this makes it to Did You Know; fixing this article took me away from other Wikipedia work and important offline tasks for a week. However, if people disagree, I quite understand. But I'll leave it in other hands now, and unwatch it. If there's a better translation for the name than I came up with, great. I think the name is a bit of a red herring as regards DYK and have outlined why I don't think it belongs at the German name, but that is as always a matter for discussion. I don't have the time or freedom from interruptions to re-learn how to reference things here in order to add additional refs. So I'm unwatching this and the nomination; hope it makes it to Did You Know. Yngvadottir (talk) 04:43, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, no criticism of you or your work meant - just of the principle that one needs to translate a name; people don't get translated so why translate the name of a building? I guess a related question is, does the German mean old city administration building or Old City Administration Building, ie is the moniker merely a description of function or is it a name? Lack of differentiation in capitalization in the home tongue don't help with that one; will see to the referencing of the tagged points, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 08:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

This might be support for the change (although a German-speaker should confirm) - the further reading includes Hansen, Antje (2006) (in German). Das alte Stadthaus in Berlin. Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag. ISBN 978-3-422-02029-0.; but the name as inscribed on the heritage register is Altes Stadthaus [2]; am I right in thinking this encapsulates the distinction between the old city administration building in Berlin and Altes Stadthaus? (More generally see eg here for the poetics and politics of renaming), Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 10:47, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

This German speaker confirms: the building is known even in the English speaking world as "Altes Stadthaus" or "Das alte Stadthaus", as an article title I prefer "Altes Stadthaus". That term needs to be translated (made understood) once in the article, from then on you can simply (!) refer to it by its name. I suggest to say in the lead "Altes Stadthaus (literally: "Old City House", by function: "Old city administration building)". I am willing to make that change tomorrow, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:18, 13 July 2012 (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.

Former? administrative building

Why is this building considered to be a former administrative building, when in the same sentence it is said that it is still used as such (by the "Senatsverwaltung für Inneres von Berlin", might be translated as department of interior.

195.88.117.31 (talk) 15:07, 18 July 2012 (UTC)Greetings from Berlin

I don't know how to say that it is no longer "The administrative building of the city", but only for one department, feel free to improve, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Altes Stadthaus, Berlin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Elekhh (talk · contribs) 15:54, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

• This is a comprehensive, very well illustrated, well structured and outstandingly well focused article. Only have a few minor points to raise, which can be fixed easily.
  • The lead should provide a better summary, by an article of this length in max. three paragraphs. I think the convoluted history of the building's uses and renovations starting with the substantial WWII damage, well described in the longest section of the article, is not yet well summarised in the lead  Done ⇒TAP 23:36, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Infobox inconsistency: (a) Height is indicated as 76m while the article states approx. 80m. (could be the statue the difference?);  Added ⇒TAP 23:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC) (b) The field "Landlord" seems unnecessary as the "owner" is also the occupier.  Done ⇒TAP 23:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC) (c) The floor area of 12,600 sqm is unreferenced.  Removed ⇒TAP 23:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC) Is this net or gross area? The figure gives the impression that the 1,000 employees must have been very crammed. (d) the characterisation of the whole building as Palladian is also unreferenced. Given that the main hall is Jugendstil, and the architect is described as historicist the building as a whole is probably rather eclectic. In absence of a good ref I would rather remove the label.  Removed ⇒TAP 23:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Layout: the building plan would be better placed near the "specifications" section, where the configuration of the building is explained. Overall it would be better if the three drawings would be grouped together as in the German Wiki article.  Done ⇒TAP 23:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Lead image: I think the image File:Berlin-Stadthaus-gp.jpg is better quality and could replace the lead image. The second image of the main Molkenmarkt façade seems superfluous.  Done ⇒TAP 23:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Will place the review on hold until these are addressed. --ELEKHH^T 06:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment - i'll leave the main review to Elekhh, just two quick comments:

• The caption for "Window detail" is a bit on the minimalist side :). Could a bit of context be added: why is this window detail notable? is this some specific style? which direction faces this window?  Done ⇒TAP 23:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
• As a German i am not sure about Note a: "A distinction is made in German ...": technically there is no fix rule in Germany, how such administrative buildings are named (aside from "Rathaus" for the main administration usually), i have seen "Stadthaus", "Stadtzentrum", "Gemeindezentrum", "Bürgerhaus" and lots more. ==> Maybe clarify, that this is the common Berlin usage.  Done ⇒TAP 23:25, 20 July 2012 (UTC) GermanJoe (talk) 07:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks GermanJoe, good observations. I always welcome additional comments to reviews I conduct, so if you come across anything else please don't hesitate to add. Also as a general note, while the review is focused on GA criteria, issues beyond that and leading towards FA might also be raised, although not considered when making the final assessment regarding the GA nomination. --ELEKHH^T 01:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

---

•  All issues addressed. ⇒TAP 23:36, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks. I did some edits myself which hope further improve it. Will have a final look tomorrow before closing it. In the meanwhile any comments welcome. --ELEKHH^T 00:49, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Some more comments - mostly minor issues, not distracting from the overall quality of the article.

• 1993 renovation (see infobox) ==> The section Complete refurbishment in the 1990s is a bit vague on the 1993 renovation. The first para explains, what "needed to be done" and what was "urgent", but doesn't spell out, which immediate actions were really taken in 1993 and which were delayed to 1994.  Removed from infobox. ⇒TAP 07:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
• During the Weimar Republic - "These plans had to be abandoned in 1931 because of the political and economic situation." ==> vague, can you add one main cause for "politics" and "economy" each or is the reasoning too complex?  Done ⇒TAP 07:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
• Post-war - "By 1950, 45% of the necessary repairs had been made to Altes Stadthaus by a few simple expedients such as emergency roofing." ==> This one seems out of chronological time-line, followed by post-war 1948 events. Maybe use it later as intro sentence for the next para?  moved ⇒TAP 07:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
• Complete refurbishment- "In 2008, plans were announced for the Constitutional Protection Division of the State Department of Internal Affairs to also move to the building, after which all divisions of the department would be housed there." ==> Any update on that plan? If not, maybe clarify with "...; as of 2012 these plans are still considered in the city council" or a similar description of the actual status.  Done ⇒TAP 07:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Overall a nice, enjoyable article with many interesting information. GermanJoe (talk) 06:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

---

 All issues addressed. ⇒TAP 07:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

• Promoted. Thanks to all involved for the good work on this article. Hope to see the article one day at FA. Thanks to GermanJoe for the meticulous co-reviewing. --ELEKHH^T 04:48, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Altes Stadthaus, Berlin. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121212035924/http://www.berlin.de/sen/inneres/stadthaus/baer.html to http://www.berlin.de/sen/inneres/stadthaus/baer.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:04, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Altes Stadthaus, Berlin. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120626115154/http://www.berlin.de/sen/inneres/stadthaus/index.html to http://berlin.de/sen/inneres/stadthaus/index.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:02, 30 September 2017 (UTC)