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 articles
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 articles
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
A fact from Karl-Günther von Hase appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 June 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that Karl-Günther von Hase, who served as a German government spokesman under three chancellors, became director of the broadcaster ZDF in 1977?
As both the Times obiturary published today and the London Gazette Notice of von Hase's successor as ambassador in London presenting his letter of credence mention, von Hase was an honorary KCMG and GCVO. I even found years for the honours on this page, but have been unable to find the notices about von Hase being given these honours in the London Gazette, or elsewhere. Could someone with more experience perhaps give me a hint as to how I can find these notices or whether we would include these honours in the article on the strength of a Times obiturary, rather than an official notice? Thank you very much in advance!--UKcrow93 (talk) 08:03, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have been able to verify the honorary knighthoods in Burke's Peerage, so I have added the info with the Burke's citation to the article. The issue I am still unsure about is whether the postnominals GCVO and KCMG should be added to the name at the top of the article. The use of both postnominals in the London Gazette on the occasion of von Hase's successor presenting his letter of credence seems to indicate that postnominals are used for honorary knights, too, but this does not seem to be the general usage here on wikipedia. Therefore I have left them out for the time being.--UKcrow93 (talk) 12:29, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I had initially restored the link to the German Empire in the Infobox,after Nikkimaria removed it and discussed the question subsequently on Nikkimaria's Talk page. This should clearly have taken place on this article talk page, so I am posting said conversation below. I agree with Nikkimaria, that the link can be removed as superfluous. If anyone else, in particular Susan Grace Bellerby or Gerda Arendt disagree, we should probably discuss the matter here and avoid back and forth revisions in the meantime.--UKcrow93 (talk) 12:02, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PREVIOUS DISCUSSION FROM USER TALK PAGE NIKKIMARIA here:
Dear Nikkimaria, you have again removed the link to the German Empire article from the infobox in the article on Karl-Günther von Hase. As I believe the link should be there, could you please explain in a few words why you consider the link wrong or superfluous? Thank you in advance.--UKcrow93 (talk) 08:15, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi UKcrow93, there are two reasons in MOS:LINK why this should not be linked. First, major geographic features are not linked per MOS:OLINK - Germany certainly falls into that category. Second, MOS:EASTEREGG indicates that linking should be intuitive - if people see a blue link on Germany, they expect to end up at the article for Germany, not some other entity. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:41, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your explanation Nikkimaria, the legal pedant inside of me is tempted to elaborate on why I disagree with your second argument, but since the first one is definitely correct and applicable, I will not bore you with that. So Thank you very much and my apologies for the unjustified revertion. Best regards --UKcrow93 (talk) 11:43, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum: I just noticed, another user has again reverted to include the link. I am opening a new section on the article talk page and will copy this discussion there, to include other contributors in the discussion. I hope that will meet with your approval.--UKcrow93 (talk) 12:02, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm neutral in the matter. I believe that a piped link showing Germany, but linking to the Empire, is the most helpful solution, but am not ready to waste time on it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:08, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
