Kommunal.az

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Albert Speer article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives (index) (index): 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months

	Albert Speer is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 13, 2008.
Article milestones Date Process Result October 19, 2008 Peer review Reviewed October 28, 2008 Featured article candidate Promoted May 12, 2019 Featured article review Kept A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 19, 2017. Current status: Featured article

Political career of Albert Speer was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 06 December 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Albert Speer. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This  level-5 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on April 25, 2019.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors Biography: Arts and Entertainment / Military / Politics and Government This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance). Military history: Biography / European / German / World War II This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history Associated task forces: /  Military biography task force European military history task force German military history task force World War II task force Architecture High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Germany High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 100 days are automatically archived 2 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 6.

Section sizes Section size for Albert Speer (24 sections) Section name Byte count Prose size (words) Header Total Header Total (Top) 7,010 7,010 476 476 Early years and personal life 2,637 2,637 326 326 Party architect and government functionary 47 12,138 0 1,527 Joining the Nazis (1931–1934) 3,909 3,909 488 488 Nazi architect (1934–1937) 1,637 1,637 172 172 Berlin's General Building Inspector (1937–1942) 6,545 6,545 867 867 Minister of Armaments 26 19,662 0 2,487 Appointment and increasing power 7,509 7,509 972 972 Consolidation of arms production 7,009 7,009 877 877 Defeat of Nazi Germany 5,118 5,118 638 638 Post-war 13 10,361 0 1,386 Nuremberg trial 2,038 2,038 265 265 Imprisonment 4,097 4,097 558 558 Release and later life 3,277 3,277 435 435 Death 936 936 128 128 The Speer myth 19 11,492 0 1,563 The "good Nazi" 6,709 6,709 936 936 Denial of responsibility 2,975 2,975 382 382 Armaments miracle 1,789 1,789 245 245 Architectural legacy 1,762 1,762 186 186 See also 474 474 0 0 References 9,490 9,490 0 0 Further reading 878 878 0 0 External links 2,089 2,089 0 0 Total 77,993 77,993 7,951 7,951

This section reads like such a desperate attempt to discredit the subject of the article that in my opinion it hurts its credibility, in what is supposed to be a neutral encyclopaedia.

A few examples:

> In his memoirs and interviews, he had distorted the truth and made so many major omissions that his lies became known as "myths".[154] Speer took his myth-making to a mass media level and his "cunning apologies" were reproduced countless times in post-war Germany}}

> Speer, Siedler and Fest had constructed a masterpiece; the image of the "good Nazi" remained in place for decades

Is that the author of the article qualifying it as a masterpiece?

> Trommer [...] he was one of the most powerful and unscrupulous leaders in the Nazi regime.

What purpose does such an opinionated sentence from one historian serve in an encyclopaedia?

> Brechtken said that if his extensive involvement in the Holocaust had been known at the time of his trial he would have been sentenced to death.

Or a hypothetical statement like this?

> The image of the good Nazi was supported by numerous Speer myths.[154] In addition to the myth that he was an apolitical technocrat [...]

This section doesn't sound like an encyclopaedia at all, but rather the paraphrasing of viewpoints held by a select few historians. Historians build their own narrative of the past based on their perception of the historical evidence, but there's an element of speculation in what a historical figure intended or was thinking, like whether they "had carefully constructed an image of himself as an apolitical technocrat". I'm not a professional encyclopaedist but I don't this as appropriate content--or at least not in the presented form.

To be clear I'm not disputing the wickedness of the subject, but that such partial writing does not belong in a neutral encyclopaedia.

What do people think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NewWorld101 (talk • contribs) 12:40, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. "He assumed his German readers would not be so gullible..." This certainly sounds as if the author has an axe to grind. David Callan (talk) 23:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The cited author, Isabell Trommer, is a German historian—a respected scholar who is perfectly positioned to define the topic. Whatever axe is being ground is the normal anti-Nazi axe that we can all learn from. Binksternet (talk) 00:28, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Modern works on Speer almost universally include material such as this. Nick-D (talk) 05:51, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Came straight to talk page after reading that section. It really is dreadful. Especially the sub-section on the armaments miracle which is for some unknown reason utterly dependent on Adam Tooze and no-one else. Tooze is a great historian, yes, but he's wrong on this matter, and he isn't the holy voice who decides whether or not Speer was actually an effective armaments minister. His views on this matter do not form the definitive academic consensus and it's very easy to dispute what he claims as all the available statistical evidence points to an increase in production under Speer's tenure, when (as the name 'armaments miracle' implies), it should have decreased. Maybe Speer did fiddle the numbers, but does anyone dispute an increase in production? No. The simple question is, given the increase, did Speer just sit around all day doing nothing as armament production improved on its own or did he actually play a hand in it, however minor? It doesn't take a genius to guess that some have in fact argued that Speer was a capable bureaucrat who played a large part. To present Tooze's view as some kind of axiomatic truth is pathetically one-sided. It should be rewritten with the counter-view. It's almost like Tooze has a personal hatred of this man he's never met in my opinion. I'm not saying remove anything, but at least present a balanced view. 82.37.67.100 (talk) 14:04, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure Ian Kershaw acknowledges his administrative abilities whilst not downplaying his deep connection to the Nazi regime. Overy also emphasizes Speer's efficiency. In fact, he directly credits Speer with significantly increasing the output of war materials, particularly tanks, fighter aircraft, and ammunition, even under the extreme pressures of bombing and resource shortages. So does Mark Mazower and Gerhard Weinberg. Why does the section only listen to Tooze's Wages of Destruction? 82.37.67.100 (talk) 14:16, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was in college when Speer was released, and can personally attest that the astonishing, fawning treatment which this article described happened, and lasted for years. The vapid Hollywood types who later went to North Vietnam to dance before the camera around the anti aircraft guns which shot down our pilots, and to China to be inspired by Mao's murderous Cultural Revolution, were out in force for the Nazi who was "an artist, just like us." It was so typical an American cultural event that the memory has lasted half a century-- a documentary, Speer Goes To Hollywood, came out in 2021, and has won seven major film prizes so far (2023). Students of American popular culture should see it. Profhum (talk) 07:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORUM, also, personal recollections are not Reliable Sources to discuss for the improvement of articles 2603:6080:21F0:6870:1803:321B:9544:790E (talk) 19:38, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody please add his family information? I don't know how to do this correctly. For example, his son was: Albert Speer (born 1934). Thank you 82.32.70.91 (talk) 20:09, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do you want to know? SanVitoresII (talk) 09:02, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In section Berlin General Building Inspector, this sentence reads vaguely: "The outbreak of World War II in 1939 led to the postponement, and later the abandonment, of these plans, which, after Nazi capitulation, Speer himself considered as “awful”.

What did Speer consider awful? The abandonment of the plans or the plans themselves? Surfingtheinterweb (talk) 08:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the English grammar is correct, he considered the plans themselves awful 2A01:B340:62:6C9A:FC3F:7EDF:FDCF:4AC0 (talk) 16:06, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At one point in the Nuremberg Trial section it is said "Speer's attorney, Hans Flächsner, successfully contrasted Speer from other defendants[121] and portrayed him as an artist thrust into political life who had always remained a non-ideologue.[122]". I don't really think that is sufficient to explain why Speer got a lighter sentence in spite of his crimes. At one point in Archive 1, there is a quote from William Shirer (from 'Rise and Fall of the Third Reich') discussed saying "Speer...made the most straightforward impression of all and who during the long trial spoke honestly and with no attempt to shirk his responsibility and his guilt." There seemed to be support for this inclusion and it was added....but I don't see it anymore. Shirer made similar comments in his second volume of memoirs, saying: "Later in the trial Speer would distinguish himself by being the only defendant to show remorse for his crimes." (p.637)

I know there has been a controversy as to how much Speer accepted of his guilt (and how much he tried to white wash it)....but as the article stands now, it really doesn't explain why Speer (right or wrong) was viewed very differently than his fellow defendants. Ergo, I propose adding the statement I quote from p.637 of Shirer's second volume of memoirs. It addresses the fact as to why he was more appealing than the rest of them (without getting into the afore mentioned controversy). It also helps set up the Speer Myth part of the article (in terms of why there was a receptive audience) much better (in my opinion) than simply noting he was "well-educated, middle class, [etc, etc]...." .Rja13ww33 (talk) 00:10, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

on 20 July 1942 he was enrolled as a SS Man on the Personel Staff of Reichsfuher Himmler [SS No 46 104] (Nazi conspiracy and aggresion vol VI pp.256) https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=250437&hilit=Albert+Speer+the+SS; however on 6 October 1942 the SS membership officer rceived the following letter:"Herewith we are returning the documentation of Reichsminister Speer with the endorsed certificate." Despite the endorsement, the letter continues, the certificate was not valid as "all personalc details, including the obligatory medical for hereditary health, are lacking. As according to instructions from the Reichsfuhrer SS direct contact is prohibited, the matter is ordered shelved."(https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=64254&p=577734&hilit=Albert+Speer+rank+in+the+SS#p577734 Message #7) 2603:6010:BB00:288B:B566:2BB2:4C38:37B (talk) 03:27, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No information about Speer's mistress appears in the article, not even her name. She was the woman who was with Speer when he had his fatal stroke in London, a German woman married to a British Army officer with whom she had two children. She even suggested to the duty officer at the Park Court Hotel, London, that he might have had a stroke. A correct diagnosis. The secrecy surrounding this woman is odd, her identity kept a secret even in the English newspapers at the time. Why do we know so little about her, I wonder. SanVitoresII (talk) 09:24, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Because she was/is a private citizen of no particular importance? The article says "He had remained married to his wife, but he had formed a relationship with a German woman living in London and was with her at the time of his death" - what more is needed? Nick-D (talk) 09:40, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gerta was the mistress to an infamous war criminal who had been very influential in the Nazi government. Both were already married which is why their relationship was a secret. This makes Gerta a woman of interest and not a private person of no importance. What more is needed, you ask. How about her name? English newspapers are not known for keeping secret about the mistresses of important men but, in this case we do not even have a name. The article might have made an attempt to let us know more about this mistress who had arrived in England about 1960 as an au pair from Germany. This was left out. When she returned to Germany she met and married a British Army officer, a Capt. or Major Peter T., with whom she had children. This was also omitted and I think it belongs in the article because people want to know more about the woman who was with Speer when he suffered a stroke. Why was her name kept from the papers? Why would people say of a mysterious person who had a relationship with a man of world renown that it is none of our business and we have no need of a healthy curiosity? This woman is part of the Albert Speer story, I think you'll agree. A young attractive Herman woman becomes intimate with an elderly convicted war criminal who falls for her. Was this a honey trap, one is bound to ask. It this why MI5 have gone to great lengths to remove her name from all public records? Was she, in fact, an agent? Recall that Albert Speer had been retained for eight hours by MI5 on his first visit to London and before he met Gerta. Was Speer being watched? The National Front was active at the time. To some, Speer was an admired Nazi celebrity who was active. For some reason Gerta's name was kept out of all public records. SanVitoresII (talk) 11:22, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Find a legitimate RS that identifies her by name and that corresponds to your speculative claims that she was potentially an MI-5 "honey pot" plant, so you can include it in the text. Otherwise, I agree with Nick-D that she's not significant enough to merit much Wikipedia text. If she was an British intelligence agent sent to collect on Albert, I very much doubt you'll find it anywhere.--Obenritter (talk) 12:14, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that MI5 and the Metropolitan Police have kept all documentation secret. That is how they work. Nevertheless, more could have been included in the text since Speer died suddenly in a London hotel and the witness' name can be found nowhere. SanVitoresII (talk) 12:25, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well until some noteworthy information about her appears in an RS, she'll remain buried in obscurity. BTW - Another angle to consider: it's also quite possible that she was enamored of just being "close" to somebody of such fame and former influence in her home country, which would mean she was just a fan girl and nothing more. --Obenritter (talk) 16:05, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, you make sense. Still, I believe MI5 knew about Gerta as did the Metropolitan Police. Had they not kept her name a secret and out of _The News Of The World_ and other inquisitive English papers, most of us would have believed she was a fling for an old man. We might not have been made suspicious. Her name has disappeared from all the publically available paperwork. Her appearance after an eight-hour interrogation of a released high-ranking WWII Nazi by MI5 at Heathrow Airport in 1973 smacks of a plant. She was ideal for the work; young (under 40 to his 76 years), and a German with long blonde hair. The political atmosphere was febrile with a growing popularity of _The National Front_ and growing neo-Nazi racism at a time when Albert Speer was writing books to whitewash the Nazis and promote the idea of the "Good German". Finding out what Speer was up to, whom he was seeing while in England and what he represented for them was important to the secret service. Some object that because MI5 and the Metropolitan Police have chosen to hush up her identity then we should not be curious. This does not work for others. There is a story here and someone needs to do some digging. SanVitoresII (talk) 01:26, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So what do you expect us to do about it? I suspect you understand we can't put it in the article as things stand.

' Wehwalt (talk) 02:04, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think whoever wrote the article should not stop at teasing us. The woman who was the witness to Speer's fatal stroke and who accompanied him to St Mary's Hospital should be named. The cover-up of her identity should be exposed and questioned. SanVitoresII (talk) 00:43, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wehwalt wrote much of the article, with contributions from a large number of other editors including myself. I strongly suspect that Wehwalt isn't part of a conspiracy to cover up the identity of Albert Speer's mistress, and I can assure you that I have no such motivation. It simply isn't relevant to the article. Nick-D (talk) 06:22, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Since the mystery woman was mentioned in the article, we deserve to know her name. SanVitoresII (talk) 07:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think you need to re-read Obenritter's comments. We are a tertiary source that uses mostly secondary sources such as journal articles and biographies. If her name was broadly included in the literature, and were she a significant figure in some other way, say through individual prominance, then it might be a good idea to mention it. Most likely it would not be, since she is almost certainly not notable under WP:GNG. For all I know, she is still alive or only recently deceased and then there would be an issue under WP:BLP. But I suspect your response will be little more than "the reader deserves to know!" so I've wasted five minutes on this response I won't be getting back. And no, I have no vested interest in Speer or the woman you mention or anything else. Wehwalt (talk) 11:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]