Talk:Spartacist uprising

Socialism Low‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany Mid‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organized Labour Mid‑importance

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been selected for the Organized Labour Portal Article Of The Day for January 6.

A fact from Spartacist uprising appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 October 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that in 1919, the discharge of the chief of police of Berlin led to a general strike and accompanying fighting known as the Spartacist uprising, in which over 500,000 workers took part?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/October.

Wikipedia

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Moderate vs Radical[edit]

These adjectives are too emotive, insufficiently objective. What is the present consensus among professional historians as to how to refer to these political groups? I would be disappointed to learn that the consensus is that one group is referred to as moderate and the other as radical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:410:A014:20:80A7:8526:20D9:DFBB (talk) 14:42, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Execution of Liebknecht and Luxemburg[edit]

Is this the correct term or would murder be more appropriate? After all, "execution" does not strictly imply unlawfulness of the killing (whereas, according to the article, the killing of Liebknecht was in direct contradiction to orders). Koo Kee (talk) 09:26, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bloody Week[edit]

Moved from user talk:czar

I can't find any other source besides Schwartzwald that refer to the uprising as Bloody Week. There aren't any German hits on "blutige Woche" either, except for the Paris Commune, which is also where most of the English searches end up. I'm fairly familiar with the topic and the period through my reading and my translations from German Wikipedia articles, and I never saw any Bloody Week references while I was verifying sources and info. Because of that, I'd like to have your update reverted unless you have something else to back up the usage of the phrase. It's probably better left with the Paris Commune.
Thanks, GHStPaulMN (talk) 15:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

@GHStPaulMN Reichstag Bloodbath and Spartacist uprising both come to mind in case there's confusion from author/editors. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:16, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
@Shushugah Sorry, but I don't quite understand your point. What's the connection between the Reichstag Bloodbath and the Sparticist uprising -- or for that matter to referring to the latter as the Bloody Week? And how would they clear up any confusion? GHStPaulMN (talk) 15:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
@Shushugah It belatedly came to me what you mean, and I agree that there's unlikely to be confusion, but for a different reason -- that I don't think Bloody Week is at all a common way to refer to the Sparticist uprising, so it's simply not likely to come up. I still know of only the one use of the phrase, and after reading p. 288 in Schwartzwald with its rather inflammatory wording (that I would flag in Wikipedia for its tone), I have question marks in my head about how reliable a source it is. So again, unless you know of another source or sources, I don't think the update / redirect add any value and should be reverted. Your thoughts on my main point about the phrase not being common? Thanks, GHStPaulMN (talk) 22:12, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

@GHStPaulMN, my understanding is that it's fairly common: [1][2][3][4][5], in-keeping with this topic being more voluminous in German and French literature. czar 02:49, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar I'm still not convinced. As for the French references, what they call the event isn't relevant to English sources. Many nations have different names for the same event -- in fact the Germans often call the Spartakusaufstand the Januarkämpfe or Januaraufstand. I couldn't find the reference in the Bloxham book, and the Eitz/Engelhardt is a reference to a use in Vorwärts, the party paper of one of the groups involved in the uprising, so not a reliable source. Even so, that's only 3 English language sources versus literally hundreds and hundreds when you query Google Books for "Spartacist uprising". "Bloody week" has all the appearances of an outlier in English that very few people are likely to be familiar with. Also, note (from the English Wikipedia article) that even though the uprising began on 5 Jan, the fighting took place on the 10th through 12th. Most of the week was taken up with strikes, building occupations, uncertainty and attempts at dialogue. Calling it a bloody week is a bit of a (propaganda?) stretch in any language. GHStPaulMN (talk) 19:39, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Refs

Schwartzwald, Jack L. (2022). Europe on the Path to Self-Destruction: Nationalism and the Struggle for Hegemony, 1815-1945. McFarland. p. 288. ISBN 978-1-4766-4685-5.
Weill, Claudie (2003). "Women in the German Revolution: Rosa Luxemburg and the Worker's Councils". In Fauré, Christine (ed.). Political and Historical Encyclopedia of Women. Routledge. pp. 267, 270. ISBN 1579582370.
Shirer, William L. (1990). Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany. Simon and Schuster. p. 55. ISBN 978-0-671-72868-7.
Kerr, John (2003). Germany, 1919-39. Heinemann. p. 15. ISBN 978-0-435-32693-7.

Here are additional English-language refs. I'm not particularly concerned about where it goes in the article, but it is indeed a term that is used for the subject. (This is exactly the reason why French/German source use is relevant: English-language scholars of foreign events tend to translate the native language rather than invent new terminology. But this point is now secondary.) czar 21:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar OK. I'll admit that it is used occasionally. It will be interesting to see how much use the redirect gets. GHStPaulMN (talk) 22:14, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]