This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I have just modified one external link on Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp. 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:
Further information: Joachim Neander (2008). "St. Georgen Gusen Mauthausen: Concentration Camp Mauthausen Reconsidered (review)". The Journal of Military History. 72 (4): 1319–1320. doi:10.1353/jmh.0.0139. buidhe 15:27, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Page moves
There have been a couple of undiscussed page moves in relation to these camps, which have meant the page histories have become detached.
On 17 January, Buidhe moved Gusen concentration camp to KZ Gusen I, without leaving a redirect, then moved her Draft:Gusen concentration camp to Gusen concentration camp, which means the page history has been split in two. Ideally those histories should be merged, and further page moves without leaving redirects should be avoided. Just to be clear, I'm commenting as an admin in case I need to move anything. The first thing for editors to decide is what the common name is for these camps. (Also, if the Nazi name is to be used, it would be KL Gusen, not KZ.) SarahSV(talk) 18:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I did that in order to avoid copy and paste move, which is discouraged. The previous article at Gusen concentration camp had been a redirect for five years and its content was fully merged into this article. If you'd like to do a histmerge, it should be to this page rather than to my new article currently at Gusen concentration camp because the content was merged here. And actually, KZ is the more common acronym in German although you could argue KL is more correct.[1] Most of the dewiki articles use KZ. buidhe 18:55, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean in this context by a copy-paste move. You developed Gusen concentration camp in draft space, which is great (thank you), but that title—with a history of edits—already existed, so you could simply have added your new content to the page. By first moving the title to something else without a redirect, it looks as though you created Gusen concentration camp, which now has two page histories: currently 21:38, 4 July 2005 – 18:07, 19 January 2020 and 01:25, 16 January 2020 – 17:36, 19 January 2020. Those are edits made either to that title or to your draft page.(As for KZ, enwiki should use the common English name. If you want to use the original, that's fine too but it would be KL.) SarahSV(talk) 19:11, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
SlimVirgin, Because I didn't realize that the Gusen concentration camp redirect had a history until I tried to move my draft to mainspace, I would have had to copy and paste it over the redirect (not ideal).
Ultimately, I think the previous Gusen page should be histmerged but with this article, because that way the content of the previous Gusen concentration camp is correctly attributed to where it exists now—in this article. There's no continuity between the previous and current Gusen articles. buidhe 19:21, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
A copy-paste move is something else; what we're discussing here is ordinary editing. When a title already exists, we edit that page, whether there's an article there or a redirect, whether we do it first in a sandbox/draft space or not. The problem now is that the current history of Gusen concentration camp looks as though it was created in 2020, when it was actually created in 2005. Some history:
I meant to add that I'm not overly fussed about undoing this for this camp, but this can be avoided in future by not moving pages without leaving redirects. When histories are split, we end up not being able to tell easily who made which edit to which page. SarahSV(talk) 20:44, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
In case it's helpful, the criteria for not leaving a redirect are at WP:PMRC.
I looked up Mauthausen in the USHMM book (Encyclopedia of Camps and Ghettos, 1933–1945, vol 1B, pp. 899–964). They call it "Mauthausen", then they have articles on "Mauthausen main camp" (by Robert G. Waite) and "Mauthausen subcamp system" (by Ralf Lechner and Christian Dürr):
The expansion of Mauthausen from a single camp into a system of camps was certain when in May 1938 it acquired the right to quarry in Gusen. In December 1939, expansion of the Gusen camp began. The Gusen subcamp was officially opened on May 25, 1940. Until January 1944, the camps operated as two camps with two relatively independent administrations. Toward the end of the war, Gusen grew into the largest camp in the Mauthausen subcamp system. ... In 1942, there were 5 Mauthausen subcamps; in 1943, 10 more were established; and in 1944, another 21 became part of the system.
There follow articles on the subcamps with a list of sources. "Gusen (with Gusen II and Gusen III)", by Robert G. Waite, is on pp. 919–921 (which I see you cited). SarahSV(talk) 00:17, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Name
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Moved as proposed. BD2412T 04:50, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp → Mauthausen concentration camp – "Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp" doesn't make much sense since Mauthausen and Gusen were not the same place, unlike Mittelbau-Dora concentration camp. If you do a google search, it first appears that "Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp" gets more results, but in fact many of these results are for "Mauthausen/Gusen concentration camp". For nearly two years the article was at "Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp complex" without any objections. I don't object to that name, because it doesn't imply that Mauthausen and Gusen were the same concentration camp. However, the current name is suboptimal. buidhe 18:39, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Comment: What about Mauthausen concentration camp complex? Given that there were numerous subcamps, would that not better reflect the scope of the camp system? --K.e.coffman (talk) 21:46, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
K.e.coffman, see the chart: Gusen was far larger than any of the other subcamps and frequently had more prisoners than the main camp, hence "Mauthausen/Gusen" and "Mauthausen-Gusen". buidhe 22:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Okay, this makes sense. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Support to narrow the scope, since Gusen has its own article. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Support per K.e.coffman. Miniapolis 01:13, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
