Talk:Berlin - Knowledge (XXG)

1656: 2365:, I understand we're all very particular in how we want this article to represent the city, but please keep in mind that the gallery shouldn't just be focused on tourist sites. I have spend quite some time in Berlin and have a solid understanding of how people of different backgrounds might perceive the city, including residents, tourists, historians, architects, artists, etc. Berlin is not just defined by those who live inside of the city. In fact, nowadays, the boundaries are blurred between those who actually live in Berlin and those who simply visit for a longer term. I'm still flexible in my own impressions and acknowledge other arguments, but I do think that simply placing a bunch of post-WW2 memorials in the main gallery is not representative of the complexity of the city as a whole. 2227:

understandable that many are critical of this aspect of Berlin culture, and that this is not unique for Berlin, per se. But, being able to cover both the historical element of the wall and the significant countercultural element of Berlin culture (which grew out of the object on which it is displayed) in one photograph for the montage has always been the most representative choice IMO. Also, from a simply pragmatic point of view, it is much easier to acknowledge the wall in a small photomontage when it is colorful, as opposed to a brown square with some frames of even tinier photographs in them. The montage therefore needs to not only be representative, but also chosen in a way that viewers can identify the important elements without having to enlarge the individual images.

1146: 2808: 2368:

seen in the gallery), and while also being a symbol of the reunification of the once divided city (aside from the Brandenburg gate)-- I also think that an additional depiction of a U-bahn on the bridge would add yet another important element nowhere to be seen in the montage (i.e. the primary mode of transport for many within the city)- the fact that the Oberbaum bridge can cover so many aspects of Berlin in a single photograph, which none of the others address, makes it a superior choice regardless whether everyone in the world has heard about the bridge or not-- it is a reprententation of Berlin and defines the city in a concise and all-encompassing way.

787: 766: 2609:

paragraph, I feel the East Side Gallery better emphasizes the hopefulness and creative energy surrounding its fall and the rebuilding of Germany, and gives a counterpoint to the Memorial Church, as well as giving a nod to Berlin's reputation as a city of artists. Finally, the view up the Spree river, showing the Oberbaumbrücke, is both scenic and historical, shows an alternative to the "blockbuster" tourist attractions, and is not in any way out of place. So far I have not seen any proposal or persuasive argument for a replacement of any of these that would clearly improve the article. --

1809: 1821: 2423:. First of all, the Holocaust memorial wasn't built by or for the city of Berlin, it was built by the Denkmal foundation and the German federal government - by German taxes, agreed on by the Bundestag. It also isn't thought to represent Berlin or the connection to Berlin, but Europe as a whole and all murdered jews (in WW2). Thus it shouldn't be interpreted as Berlin specific, Berlin just "happens" to be the German capital. It's misplaced in the lede in various ways, even though it's located close to Brandenburg Gate (which is both Berlin and Germany specific). 2224:

while taking into account all points of view--- it should be a carefully constructed overview of the diversity in architecture, cityscape, and history of the city. I am still convinced that the montage as it stood for many months prior to the more recent edits had best achieved this; its long standing lifespan confirms this. The previous montage had a good balance of monuments/sights from various eras that are now no longer represented, such as the Kaiser Wilhelm Gedaechtniskirche (now nowhere to be seen in the entire article) and the Oberbaum bridge.

2120: 2056: 1992: 2777: 1614: 738: 2021: 1166: 2156: 2092: 1685:"Several people" was you and an IP. Whatever - we are not voting here. The East Side Gallery claims to be a Berlin Wall Memorial but since there is an official Berlin Wall Memorial that represents a real historical accurat wall section with "Todesstreifen" aswell as a documentation centre, a memorial and a chapel in memory of the victims of the wall, your beloved Gallery is less relevant for the Article Berlin. As i already pointed out in an earlier discussion (which you deleted) on your ( 486: 2765: 2577:. The selection of the lead images will always be to some extent subjective, as it's not possible to find a reliable source that says "these six images are the objectively correct representation of Berlin." There are many factors to be considered in choosing the subjects, not only popularity with tourists, or official government status. Sometimes a photo of a lesser-known subject may be included for diversity as well as for being particularly scenic or picturesque, for example the 2329: 1198: 2789: 308: 2131: 2067: 2003: 797: 2653: 2167: 2138: 2103: 2074: 2039: 2010: 261: 1628: 1644: 1219: 1308: 896: 871: 1506: 1108: 1080: 652: 624: 1797: 540: 970: 942: 519: 2149: 231: 1046: 550: 2085: 956: 477: 662: 980: 718: 2028: 2601:'s view that adding additional sombre war memorials such as the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, and the Window of Remembrance picturing those who were killed at the Berlin Wall, would be too much. Such an overweight representation also might not be consistent with the principle of "least shock value" in lead images, explained in the 1229: 2285:'s work. However, I think that the later Oberbaumbrücke photo was an improvement. But using it with the older East Side Gallery photo also creates a size mismatch... so my compromise was to use the earlier East Side Gallery photo with the Oberbaumbrücke photo that makes the size match everything else. That's the version 2277:, which also replaced the Oberbaumbrücke photo with a similar one, to match the size. An alternative could be to duplicate the photo with Mauricio Macri (his presence does make it more interesting) with an accurate description and filename. I would also support restoring to the previous stable version before that, from 2339:"Fangfrage": Do any of the other editors arguing here actually live in Berlin? Cause i do and i keep wondering about leadin picture choices like the Oberbaumbrücke, which i actually dont know and never heard of. Not as a claimed Landmark and not a tourist attraction. Are you into historic Buildings? What about the 2540:'s objections to the East Side Gallery photo as being inappropriate and needing to be removed, on the basis that it is simply some old dirty concrete with nondescript "teenygangsta" graffiti; that it fails to be a serious memorial to the dead (which no one has claimed it to be); that a gallery of street art in 2636:

just as well, they also have their huge, huge historical flaws and faults, but no one thinks of derailing their collage with guilt memorials and insignia of horror. Only Berlin so far seems to evoke the need to do something like that, which shouldn't be tolerated in a neutral encyclopedia. We've seen

2596:

There are dozens of subjects that could conceivably be illustrated. The Brandenburg Gate and the Reichstag are nearly unquestionable. The downtown skyline - typical for every major-city article - with the TV Tower, and that of the western side with the Memorial Church, are also I think essential. The

2383:

I disagree. We should offer sources that prove or include very strong evidence about our picture choices being the best representation of the city. Your arguments for the Oberbaumbruecke are the opposite - your pov, an essay, a makeup. Tourist visitornumbers are ofcourse not the main focus but a very

1701:

there instead of "some kids Graffiti" on an old dirty concrete wall from the 60-80s. Anyway, the East Side Gallery is not "world famous". The Berlin wall certainly is. Berlin is a city in the center of world history in good and bad. Its full with famous places. They keep making historic movies there.

2689:

i guess... Fortunately Berlin has so many real, original unique and historic Landmarks. We could easily fill 5-6 additional galleries with pictures. Its not about inappropriate, its about the best choices. Old concrete walls from the wrong side, with a copy of the art on the Berlin wall in the wrong

2464:

is a Berliner. She lives and works here and she was born here, in Berlin. Its common that a non-profit membership organization is founded to plan, build and then supervise such projects. The foundation is in Berlin. The German federal government and the Bundestag are infact Berliners. Our Chancellor

2241:

Also, I do agree that certain monuments, like the Siegessaeule, Holocaust Memorial, and a more representative photo of the Berlin Wall Memorial should be highlighted somewhere else in the article. I have found it consistently appalling that there is not a single image of the Siegessauele anywhere in

2205:

had restored, except with the problematic "Mauricio Macri" photo replaced by the new one. Having read through all the comments and arguments, I'm going to put this into the article on the basis that there's a consensus to show these subjects (City West skyline with Memorial Church, Brandenburg Gate,

2750:

is an icon of independence and liberty of/in the united states, that became the most famous landmark of New York? Just as a sidenote, i bet Reinhold Begas put more work into any of his complementing sculptures than all artists of your beloved East Side Gallery put in together. The city is full with

2547:

With regard to the other two photos that have also been removed: For more than a century, Oberbaumbrücke has been the longest, most well-known, and most picturesque bridge in Berlin. It began in 1902 to carry the first Berlin U-Bahn line across the Spree River, which it continues to do today. It is

2516:

art project of post-wall Germany. Over 100 recognized artists were invited to create original artworks on the section of unpainted eastern wall. According to them it is "understood as a monument to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the peaceful negotiation of borders and conventions between societies

2367:

Yes, the Oberbaumbruecke may not be the most iconic sight in Berlin, but given that the Red Rathaus is already visible in the skyline view from Tiergarten, it is the only other worthy site that highlights the ubiquitous red brick architecture, while also including a view of the Spree (no where else

1978:

Oh, I just realized the link is to a different ESG photo than is in the linked revision. I had thought about Berlin_Wall6331.JPG which had also been in the article for some months, prior to the Mauricio Macri one. The older one, East_Side_Gallery.JPG, is a little low resolution (if you click on it)

1838:

The socalled "wall" was actually 2 walls with a minefield, shooting traps, fences and watchtowers on the socalled Todesstreifen inbetween. The painted wall was ofcourse only the other one that faced West Berlin. Its a historical lie! That exact wall segment, claimed to be the longest still existing

2343:

then? Thats shurely more important than one of the 1000 Berlin Bridges. Its even mentioned as a "popular tourist spot" and allot of events happen there. I am even more shocked that size match of images is a more important argument to some here than what 1 Million tourists each year want to visite.

2226:

As to the Berlin Wall, I agree that it should somehow be included-- that said, the East Side Gallery, regardless of its status as a memorial or not, has always looked the best in the montage, while also offering an element that represents the important aspect of street art culture in Berlin. It is

1606:

Personally, I support the East Side Gallery as being a world-famous emblem of Berlin. The Berlin Wall Memorial is important in its own way, but just doesn't have that kind of status. For the photo, I'd like to see one of the more well-known artworks, ideally from before the fence that's now there.

2272:

correctly pointed out, the filename and description in Spanish: "Berlín, Alemania. 26 de abril de 2012. El jefe de Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Mauricio Macri, visitó hoy el monumento que recuerda a las víctimas del Holocausto en la ciudad de Berlín" appears to misidentify the East Side

2223:

We have to understand that no one is going to be 100% satisfied with any single photomontage of Berlin that we can come up with-- for a city with so much diversity in sights and monuments, this is quite impossible. Therefore we should strive to find the best balance of selection for this montage,

1782:

Btw. the "East Side Gallery" is actually completely fake! The "East side Gallery" as the name hints is actually the socalled "Hinterland" wall, the other wall, facing the east Berlin side, which was never painted by artists or decorated with graffiti in the time of the separation of West and East

1752:

It was even a needed improvement, else i would not have changed it. I also do not understand why some concrete walls with (mostly silly "teenygangsta") graffiti on it makes a good picture representing Berlin, since you can find these in every major city around the world, except in china or saudi

2200:

I found a better ESG photo on Flickr and uploaded it. It's basically an upgraded version of the previous ones, with better composition, good color and resolution. I put it along with the earlier Oberbaumbrücke photo, in the version on the right. So that's now exactly the same as the last stable

1730:. The fact that there were several previous versions of East Side Gallery photos from other editors, and that it has been the status quo for more than two years, indicates to me a basic consensus about it. I don't think your change is an improvement, but thanks for sharing your point of view. -- 1669:

The first is one of the most famous, and the only work with its own Knowledge (XXG) article. I especially like the couple kissing in front of the mural. Thierry Noir is the first artist to be known for painting the wall, having done so since the mid-80s, and his figures are recognizable around

2608:

Although a case could possibly be argued for replacing the East Side Gallery or Oberbaumbrücke with Checkpoint Charlie (or any number of other subjects) I feel they are both the stronger candidates. I think it is natural to represent the Berlin Wall. But given the reasoning in the preceding

2685:: You needed 3 pages of spinning for your attempt to ridicule my arguments. I never wrote the East Side Gallery was inappropriate. Its just completely fake(!) in what it poses to be as i proved with evidence and sources. Las Vegas also has fake landmarks, as i pointed out. That is ok for 1907:

is not a monument/memorial but just a world famous Landmark, so your math looks wrong. Nomatter, Monuments and Memorials are the Landmarks of cities with a long history. Additional, as i already pointed out, if any "Gallery" in Berlin should be mentioned or "pictured", it should be the

2720:. Such memorials are purposefully created as "guilt memorials" and I don't see anything wrong with that. All I'm saying is that it's not a general representation of the city itself, rather the country and its culture. Thus I see it as misplaced in a Berlin collage at the lede. Cheers, 2392:

is a major representation of the city and build by the city for exactly that reason. Again! Build by the city(!) for exactly and only representing its history in a way the city views as appropriate! How dare you to throw that out of the lead and argue about your personal view or like

1327: 2532:, the "paintings such as Dmitri Vrubel's "Bruderkuss" between Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev and GDR leader Eric Honecker or Günther Schaefer's "Vaterland," blending the German and Israeli flags have become iconic". High-quality images of the paintings can be found 1875:

People, people! This is a city article, not a mere history or tourism article. We now have 3(!) memorials in the lead collage, with the wall monument, Holocaust memorial and Checkpoint Charlie. That's way too much. One should be sufficient. I opt to restore

2517:

and people", and has more than three million visitors annually. The murals were described by Deutsche Welle as an "artistic response to one of the most important moments in history". The artworks were commissioned as one of the last official acts of the

3023:

I just removed the Germany map and it has resolved the problem. The article HTML source contains a NewPP report with "Lua memory usage: 33158319/52428800 bytes" meaning the memory used is 19MB less than maximum whereas before it was over the maximum.

2525:, heritage-protected landmark status, by the new government of Berlin. The murals and gallery were repainted and renovated in 2009, with the involvement of nearly all the original artists, by the city of Berlin, at a cost of over two million Euros. 2503:

I apologize for the length of the following, for such a seemingly small issue as a few photos. But I feel it's important to follow the process of consensus based on accurate information and arguments, especially for the lead of this major article.

1753:

arabia, today. Since its clearly LESS relevant and specific to Berlin than the Berlin wall and its history and your only argument is "status quo for more than two years" i can only conclude its objectively an improvement. I even gave you a source (

2206:

East Side Gallery, and Oberbaumbrücke), a consensus to not include the Berlin Wall Memorial, Holocaust Memorial, or Checkpoint Charlie at this time, and that these specific photos or substantially similar ones fulfill the aim of the consensus. --

2384:

strong prove that some location is representative, especially if its not the central station but a place that represents a part of the cities history. Especially regarding the cities history in WWII and its central role in the Holocaust (see

1756:) with a ranking of the cities Landmarks by visitors which you completely ignore. You only cherrypicket one side-argument you could easily counter from my answer. Dont thank me for sharing my point of view if you actually ignore it! -- 1954:'s analysis and proposal, thanks for making it. To be accurate though, that specific version had not been stable, but is based on previous stable versions, offered as a compromise in order to overcome some problems. See my reply to 2508:

has asserted that three of the six photos are inappropriate and needed to be removed from the photomontage - indeed from the article altogether. With regard to the reasoning given for this, I offer the following fact-checks:

2556:, needs no introduction. Again you may judge for yourself the accuracy of the objections to both of these photos as being inappropriate and needing to be removed, on the basis of the surprising claim of a Berliner having 1155: 1090: 955: 1655: 2887:

with all due respect, but you can find this sort of scenery in any German city, especially in the failed industry zones at the outskirt of a German city. The graffiti is a urban youth-culture phenomenon in

1839:

original wall section, is in deed part of the original border construction but that wall never got painted on by "artists and free people" in its time, like the west side wall. In fact some artists started

153: 2242:

the article, an important secondary landmark. Also after the current edits of the gallery, the Kaiser Wilhelm Gedaechtniskirche is also nowhere to be seen, as this was the only place where it was shown.

3153: 2484:") is a "bullseye" strike into your argument. This additionally proves my earlier argument: A Berliner would most likely know all this (and agree to my picture choices without long discussions). -- 1442: 3045: 2863:

also worth mentioning, and with a rather central location. I like the gallery above. But I would like to have added both Unter den Linden and Kurfürstendamm - too, not instead. Famous streets.

1808: 1619: 3118: 3083: 409: 1400: 3213: 3158: 2678:

to be precise. I am all for free speech - dont get me wrong - even for Mr. Höcke, but fortunately that is still definitely not a majority view. Neither in germany nor elsewhere.

1456: 1603:. Several people have tried to put it back, but the editor always reverts them. I'd like to discuss some kind of consensus about it. Which site do you prefer, and which photo? 2512:

The East Side Gallery was an initiative in 1990 of the newly-unified national artists' organizations of East and West Germany, the VBK and the BBK. It was the first official

1820: 2807: 222: 3108: 1393: 1386: 1120: 747: 638: 2589:, but each individual editor will have their own point of view about how best to accomplish that. For that reason it is especially important to follow the process of 1693:. Maybe that is the reason why they called it "Gallery" and the other place is called "Memorial"? Btw. there are also many other Galleries in Berlin. For example the 1119:, a collaborative effort to improve Knowledge (XXG)'s coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please 1903:

claims to be a "Denkmal", aka Monument aka Memorial, itself, so your argument of switching back to that because there are to many memorials makes no sense. On top

853: 319: 3223: 3218: 1357: 1331: 1613: 147: 1414: 1372: 1285: 490: 79: 3173: 3143: 3123: 1599:

in the lead photomontage since at least February 2015 (though not always the same photo). A few weeks ago, it was replaced with a photo of a monument at the

843: 3243: 3103: 1036: 3233: 3208: 2674:: "derailing their collage with guilt memorials and insignia of horror."?? That is exactly the view of some radicals of the new german alt-right movement. 1275: 2273:

Gallery as the Holocaust Memorial. So I agree it shouldn't be in the article in that condition. At the time, I offered a similar photo to replace it with

606: 3183: 2597:

church is a fitting symbol of grief over the loss of lives and destruction, on all sides of the war, and the message to never forget. But I agree with

1670:

Berlin; these two photos were both previously in the photomontage for some time, so already have support. There are of course other possibilities... --

3193: 3148: 1720:

There is no claim that the East Side Gallery is a memorial, so I don't consider that argument relevant. You have reverted three different people, me,

1643: 1026: 1379: 1115: 1085: 902: 876: 819: 3203: 3133: 596: 447: 390: 85: 3238: 3113: 2544:, commemorating the fall of the wall, is "completely fake" because it failed to exist before the wall fell; or that it was not built by the city. 2449: 2389: 1899:

Well Berlin is a city of monuments. Naturally because it was and still is a center of somuch History and the German capital. Besides the socalled

1251: 2628:

is the prime example of how it should be done. These photo collages need to be representative of the city without over-politicising the matter.

2281:, which is the same except for the East Side Gallery and Oberbaumbrücke photos. Personally I do prefer the earlier East Side Gallery photo with 1702:

Famous ones! Also because something was in the Article for a long time is not a reason to keep it there if something better is added instead. --

3198: 2764: 1353: 1407: 1179: 1002: 334: 3168: 3163: 3138: 3093: 572: 329: 30: 2859:

is even better preserved, from the moats' point of view at least. There is one well preserved in Belgium also (Antwerpen ?). Kastellet at

1428: 810: 771: 727: 692: 634: 3228: 2788: 1145: 3188: 3049: 2369: 1242: 1203: 325: 99: 3178: 3128: 2690:

place? How does that represent the real Berlin? I want to show the real Berlin. So many interesting places, somuch art. Do you know

2552:, and an important symbol of a reunified Berlin. The skyline of the western downtown/Zoo area, with the article's only image of the 2528:

Several books have been published, and a feature-length documentary film produced, about the artworks and the gallery. According to

2776: 1627: 993: 947: 104: 20: 2943: 1174: 1094: 563: 524: 74: 3098: 3088: 2518: 2397:

argue its one to many memorials. Why you think Berlin build that memorial in its city center so every visitor will see it? The

1449: 1338: 1320: 675: 629: 499: 2553: 1347: 1061:

or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the

44: 2558: 1600: 65: 786: 765: 2533: 1421: 290: 286: 1932:), which makes your math look right again but also shows how wrong your argument of "to many monuments" really is. -- 168: 2119: 2055: 1991: 230: 185: 135: 1054: 307: 109: 2725: 2642: 2431: 1889: 3044:

The German Knowledge (XXG) and official sources give the area as 891.7 square kilometers. What's going on here?

1796: 241: 2549: 1470: 2020: 505: 3064: 2470: 2373: 1884:), it has been stable and represented various aspects of the city without any POV tendencies. Thank you. -- 1510: 1435: 907: 881: 737: 324:, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the 2794: 2856: 2590: 1754: 294: 55: 2155: 2091: 1921: 1250: