Talk:List of German inventors and discoverers

Criteria for inclusion

Please be sure that the inventor or discoverer is German or of German heritage / descent. For example, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is often classified as Austrian, but lived in an Era, where Austria was part of the Holy Roman Empire, his nationality is therefore German. Mozart's nationality was, strictly speaking, that of the Prince-Archbishopric of Salzburg and therefore a German citizen of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation.

When adding an inventor or a discoverer to the main section, please check first to see if he or she is already in the list. If he or she is not, you might also check to see if an article exists (by entering the title in the Search box and pressing Go), as some editors may have forgotten to add their articles on German inventors to this list. When you add an inventor or a discoverer to this list, please add him or her in proper alphabetical order within the appropriate section. Please include the year of invention or discovery and list key information of the invention, as well as the references for it. After an inventor article has been created, the link on this page will be blue. Please move these titles into the main (existing article) section after creating the show article.

I would add for clarification - I read once a nonsense debate in the talk page of the Mozart article heavily fighting people against identifying German, even with false claims (to say nothing of the best solution would have been "ethnic German" thus satisfy those who were only afraid with the confusion of Germany) - Mozart lived in an era where Austria was part of the Holy Roman Empire, but his birthplace was not part of Austria then, and he was not German because of the dedcution mentioned above (since it was independent from Austria's relation to the Holy Roman Empire). Anyway, Austrian national identity exists and were developed after WWII, did not exist before as Austria has been a German state where people as well identified, called and regarded themselves as Germans. Correctly Mozart was a (ethnic) German of Prince-Archbishopric of Salzburg.(KIENGIR (talk) 22:04, 1 January 2019 (UTC))

General topics

Where is Alois Franz Nepomuk Senefelder - the inventor of Steyndruck - lithography - before the e-book era, off set using the same principle he devised was the most wide spread printing technology in the world?

This is however not the best idea to quote Mr Albert Einstein here, the physicist said to have researched some areas of theoretical physics. We need a lot of verification in his case because of an essential contribution of work, ideas coming from his wife Maric
--Capekm (talk) 03:21, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Notes section

This article has a section titled, "notes" which gives instructions on editing it. I moved this to hidden text, but an editor has readded [1] it. This notes section exists solely to give advice and as such I fail to see why hidden text is inadequate for this purpose. Giving advice or information on editing an article is one of the listed uses for hidden text and the justification that "hidden text cannot be seen" is not valid because editors adding to the article will see hidden text. Reatlas (talk) 11:40, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I initiated this article in February 2009‎. The notes are important and rightful, a fact, no one has disputed for over four years. Greetings! --Hyperboreer 13:58, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:OWN, initiating the article doesn't make it yours. Now, I have no issue with the fact that notes can help users edit the page. But you haven't addressed why we can't simply move this advice to hidden text, where only editors changing the page will see it. As I said earlier, this is one of the purposes of hidden text. Reatlas (talk) 22:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Your reasons for hiding the notes are not plausible and are herewith rejected. Notes are important. An editor does NOT see the hidden notes, when he or she goes, for example, directly to the section "B", "D", "S" and so on and so forth. --Hyperboreer 11:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyperboreer (talk • contribs)

We are here to discuss until we come to an agreement about how this page should be written. You have accused me of not having reason or discussion [2], yet I was clearly willing to talk and discuss as you can see I have been commenting on this page to try and work out an agreement, but you did not reply to my comment after one and half weeks and so i took action assuming you did not object anymore. Reatlas (talk) 16:17, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

That is not true, you hid the text without any discussion, then, realizing that there is resistance, you urge to "discuss and agree". We will just have to disagree on this topic, and the page will stay as it has been since 2009. The world will not decline for this matter, I am sure you will agree. --Hyperboreer 20:34, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Now, you have not replied regarding the fact that editing instruction is a clearly stated use of hidden text. Please be more specific on why this rule applies on all other pages except this one. Editors who go straight to editing a specific alphabetical section, as you mentioned, will also not see this Notes section, since it is at the bottom of the page, and there is nothing so urgently specific about this page that means it needs a section dedicated to warning editors on how to edit. I think that leaving this notes section in just adds unnecessary length to a page, since only a very small fraction of the people reading this page will be editing it for the first time. If you hate hidden text so much, perhaps we could leave all these warnings and instructions on the talk page and send editors who don't edit according to your standards there? I understand and agree that it is important to maintain page quality, but removing that warning isn't going to cause a massive flood of unconstructive posts. Thanks, Reatlas (talk) 16:19, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

On the contrary, that is exactly, what I believe. The "Notes section" serves the purpose of directing editing, and on THIS page (naturally my comments apply only to this page), I find it quite necessary. In my opinion the length of the list is within reason. Greetings, Hyperboreer 20:37, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Are you aware of WP:BRD? What I did exactly follows an established procedure for editing. However, what you are doing, which is simply insisting that your way is right and refusing to discuss much other than "the page will stay as it is", does not follow this. I'm sorry, but you must realize that shouting and repeating one thing over another person saying the exact opposite, does not reflect consensus, which is what we should be trying to seek. Again, I raise my previous suggestion, perhaps we move this "instructions before editing" section to the talk page, then leave an ambox on the page header that will ask editors to read it before editing? I think this is a good compromise, since all editors will definitely see it before editing. See here for example. Reatlas (talk) 03:10, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like a good compromise to me, I will adjust and see, how it looks. -- Hyperboreer 14:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I no longer see the notes on the page. Is this resolved? Reatlas is in line with wikipedia policy and common practice in making editing notes hidden. Hyperboreer, if you disagree, please link to wikipedia policy or guidelines pages to support your arguments. Dialectric (talk) 04:29, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hermann Bahlsen

Certainly the butter cookie was not invented 100 years ago but much earlier. Probably he introduced the industrially made butter cookie in Germany? The German Wikipedia says he learned about the “cakes” in England. It would be excellent to cite a scientific/historical source for the claim. The German Wikipedia article cites at least an obscure source. A long comment in Wikipedia is no source and does in no way solidify the statements made! This Wikipedia list is about people and not about companies that have “been one of the leading trendsetters in the industry for factory-produced sweet cakes and cookies as well as new technologies”. That is what all companies claim on their websites. And frankly, it is just marketing phrases, without any substance. The person has no article in the English Wikipedia, guess why? I recommend to take this out and will do so if there are no objections Herbertkarl (talk) 10:08, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Bauknecht

The first electric sewing machine was developed by Mr. Singer. So even motors for sewing machines were developed elsewhere. The invention of Allfix (?????) does not seem to have shaken the world previous to this IP-edit. Herbertkarl (talk) 20:29, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Freud?

Freud was Austrian Jewish (parents of Ukrainian-Jewish background, born in Moravia), should he really be considered German? Historian932 (talk) 19:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

i deleted Feud. You have right. 47.64.247.89 (talk) 22:49, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Women?

I was surprised to only find 2 women in this list. Of course men were especially privileged in natural science but maybe we should do some research to identify more female inventor and discoverers --Nehrener (talk) 08:49, 16 October 2014 (UTC)