Talk:Federal Convention (Germany)

Germany High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hello, I think you can remove the stub message, there is nothing more to say about the Bundesversammlung. But some historic details I can add in the next days. But first I have to refresh my English a bit, not written for many years. --Grabert 23:32, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely success

"The candidate, whose party or parties have the majority, is considered to be the likely winner and mostly, he got the majority." Have there been any cases when the public affiliation of the majority members was not reflected in the result? matturn 12:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. However, there are usually some "unfaithful electors" - e.g. in 2004, Horst Köhler got less votes than the total number of delegates from CDU, CSU and FDP, although these parties had pledged to vote for him. One elector even admitted publicly to voting for the "wrong" candidate.--Roentgenium111 (talk) 19:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem of the wording might be the part "have the majority". E.g. Herzog did not "have" the majority until the FDP withdrew their candidate after the second round.--Ziko (talk) 22:34, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"lower house"

The Bundestag is not "(the lower house of Germany's parliament)". The German constitution doesn't know terms of lower or higher, there is both Bundestag = parliament and Bundesrat, which is *not* a parliament. --194.239.181.126 (talk) 17:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Bundesrat and Bundestag are two chambers within the German bicameral legislature. "Lower House" is not generally an official term anywhere - it is a descriptive term occasionally used for one of the houses in a bicameral system. AndrewRT(Talk) 18:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Lower House must needs be in some way lower. If not as to power, then as to e. g. nobility. Yet the Diet ranks above the Council in every way, except the somewhat oddity that the Council's President replaces the President of the Federation - in ordinary protocol however ranks below the President of the Diet. And that is probably for avoiding a formal or semi-formal Vice-President, as this office is passed around among the governors in annual terms. --77.4.95.188 (talk) 22:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

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.

The result of the move request was article moved to Federal Convention (Germany). Bundesversammlung articles for other countries should considered separately. Aervanath (talk) 15:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The name of this article is not english! I suggest it is renamed to Federal Assembly (Germany) per policy WP:Use English. AndrewRT(Talk) 22:12, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is a guideline, not policy. Which term is used most often in English sources? — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 23:17, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support a move to an English name per WP:UCN (Use common names) and WP:UE (Use English).

The one cited source. Deutsche Welle, uses the term "Federal Assembly." However, the term used in the Basic Law translation at http://www.bundestag.de is "Federal Convention." (here, p. 38) The Presidential website also uses "Federal Convention" as does this source.

I personally prefer "Federal Assembly" because it more clearly and precisely describes what the body is. "Federal Convention" could imply other meanings found at the convention article, e.g. a temporary convention (meeting)/political convention or a treaty. "Assembly" doesn't have this range of political connotations. But I recognize that "Federal Convention" seems to have a more sound basis in actual usage. — AjaxSmack 03:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, "Assembly" is immediatly understood as a political body, while "Convention" has other meanings like a treaty. But we should stick with already existing official translations, and if "Convention" has a connotation with "temporary", the better. Ziko (talk) 10:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If "Federal Convention" is more commonly used, we should stick with that. What about Bundesversammlung (Austria), Bundesversammlung (Switzerland) and Bundesversammlung (German Confederation), though? Should those be included in this move request as well? Jafeluv (talk) 08:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Federal Convention (Germany). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120319091201/http://www.bundestag.de/htdocs_e/bundestag/elections/federal_convention/index.jsp to http://www.bundestag.de/htdocs_e/bundestag/elections/federal_convention/index.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:27, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Federal Convention or Federal Assembly

Hello, I would like to start this discussion (again) and ask to decide on the name of this institution and also on the name of the Bundesversammlung of the German Confederation of 1815. How about using "Federal Convention" for the 1949 organ to elect a president, because "convention" sounds more like a meeting during a shorter time. And "Federal Assembly" would be great for the 1815 organ that was a permanent institution. Or, does "assembly" sounds to English native speakers more like a parliamentary organ? Then "convention" may be more suited for the 1815 organ. Opinions? Ziko (talk) 19:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The legal translation of "Bundesversammlung" in English is "Federal Convention". I refer to the official website of the Bundestag (www.bundestag.de/en/parliament/function/federal_convention/federal_convention-201836) on which this designation is also used several times. Essixt (talk) 20:21, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]