Talk:Prince Klemens Wenzel von Metternich

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Contents

[edit] Sources???

There's not even one source listed for all this stuff... that's a problem. Nrbelex (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lasting Principles

The article should mention Metternich's primary political principles. He accepted deception as a legitimate tool of state. He acted pragmatically rather than on moral or ethical principles. And he practiced engaging other nation diplomatically, playing one off against the other for the purpose achieving a balance of power. Kissinger's studies of Metternich brought these principles into modern usage and shaped recent history. 70.162.78.92 17:09, 23 February 2006 (UTC) Steve Wolfer

[edit] Credibility

If anything makes an article lose its credibility in the eyes of a critical reader, it is the inability to place an apostrophe in the right place. OK, we can all make mistakes, and maybe this is a just a minor mistyping. Or perhaps the author just does not understand how apostrophes work ... and if that is the case, what else does he not understand? The word "committee's" in the last paragraph on Post-Napoleonic Europe is a plural ... no apostrophe needed (Harry Goldsmith)

Apostrophe placement is actually a rather poor measure of credibility, and many useful essays are written by authors whose editors save them from this sort of obvious mispunctuation. That said, it is probably less work for you to fix these minor solecisms than to write at length about their implications....<g> - Nunh-huh 23:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A poor translation?

Tried editing the first section (and have removed text like 'your gay') but it is very stilted as if translated. Needs a total rewrite by someone who knows the period. rsloch 00:55, 10 June 2006 (GMT)

[edit] Link not working

Link 1 (http://www.h-net.org/~habsweb/sourcetexts/censor.htm) does not work.

I have just tried it, and it does work. Check your browser's config.Chimba 21:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article needs major work

I have just done some editing and formatting. I have also indicated the many parts where it needs sources, although there are a few common-knowledge things I have let pass. This one needs major work, and is essential as a link between post Napoleonic Europe and WWI. I'll try to do some work, but I have yet to find sources.Chimba 21:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


I needed to look up where this guy- Prince Metternich was born and that information is not even in this article! It just says he was born in Austria- that doesn't help. 68.18.162.224 21:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Way to go, pedants.

Congratulations on making the article completely unreadable by adding fact tags to every sentence. --76.188.161.254 18:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WAY too many "citation needed"s

Honestly, the big fat one at the top of the page is enough, we know up front that the article in unsourced. Adding a "citation needed" tag to every single sentence is unnecessary and just renders it garbled and unreadable. I think we should remove most of them. 83.11.3.17 11:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Object! The article is UGGLY! An extra "citation needed" is a mark of higher priority lapsi. F.ex.:
After World War II some historians pointed out that one of the main reasons for his opposition to giving power to the people was his apprehension that eventually it would lead to the political dominance of German nationalism.
not to be objected as such: some extremely biased historians may actually claim such self-proving stuff. But after WWII the NPOV of historians was in a very bad shape, demonizing Germany instead of nazism – and the opposite can very well be claimed, that Metternich'es actions in the long run had the effect of emergence of authoritarian rule instead of democracy in Germany. I think this is an example of blatant logical faults (of the historians, not us), that deserve such statements to be moved far down into the article, into a discussing section on the political thinking of Metternich. Said: Rursus ☻ 07:15, 19 April 2008 (UTC)