Talk:Adolf Eichmann

Lead photo

I'm proposing that the lead photo (in SS uniform) be replaced w/ the photo in the Trial section. The subject's notoriety is largely from his capture & trial, so this image would be more recognizable. Separately, the later photo summarizes Eichmann's life, instead of presenting him as almost a propaganda icon. --K.e.coffman (talk) 20:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

• 
  (1942)
• 
  (1961)

I think the time has long past since the uniform image would be considered "propaganda", in anything other than an historical sense. I'd also take issue with the claim that his notoriety "is largely from his capture & trial". I'd say that his notoriety lies in his responsibility for the killing of 5.1 million Jewish people. That happened, while he wore that uniform, regardless of his eventual capture and trial. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:08, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't have a strong preference — Diannaa (talk) 03:23, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't have a strong preference, either. Kierzek (talk) 02:20, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

I agree with the image change. The photo shows a smug authoritative confidence conferred by one of the worst ideologies of the 20th Century. This ideology continues to hold some in its thrall and the imagery is part of that. The photo of him in the dock facing the judgement of a civil society is more appropriate. 2001:8003:70F5:2400:7145:DD44:14B4:50BD (talk) 07:02, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm Jewish and that picture doesn't offend me. It looks like a standard photo portrait that is commonly taken by the services or the government. I guess it can be annoying that he's smiling or it makes him look heroic or something. I get that but I think maybe people are reading too much into it. It says more about the skill of the photographer than the man himself. I happen to think it's a very good picture. Valgrus Thunderaxe (talk) 05:23, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Zionism

Arendt’s famous book on Eichmann makes some discussion on his support of Zionism (it was a way to get the Jews to leave Germany and achieve Judenfrei). An awkward part of the article to be sure, and one to be done with care, but something that seems likely to be worth addressing. 2601:601:A400:B5F5:A12E:AF06:499F:2B6B (talk) 15:24, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Yonah Elian

Why would the name of the doctor who played in a critical role in subduing Eichmann that allowed his notorious extradition not be relevant to his Wikipedia page? Especially when there's an entire subsection dedicated to his capture in Argentina. MumpsimusManchuMagi (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it's an important detail, but I'm not going to edit war about it. — Diannaa (talk) 01:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

The Daily Beast

I have removed the recend additions sourced to The Daily Beast. I don't think a tabloid is a good scholarly source for information on historical topics and there's no consensus at WP:RSPS that it's a reliable source. There was one small addition sourced to Haaretz but I am unable to evaluate the material because the article is behind a paywall. I removed the added section headers as well; I personally am not in favor of splitting up the material this way. Discussion welcome. — Diannaa (talk) 11:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you about the DB. As for Haaretz, here is what it says and I consider it reliable:

"Eichmann’s lawyer, Robert Servatius, then requested clemency from President Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, who passed the request on to the attorney general, Gideon Hauser.

Hauser felt the issue was momentous enough that it should be decided upon by the government, which met secretly that same afternoon, at Frumin House in Jerusalem, where the Knesset then met.

The minutes of that government meeting were only declassified a few years ago. In a 2007 article in Haaretz, historian Yechiam Weitz described how Finance Minister Levi Eshkol, who a few years later would become Israel’s prime minister, asked his colleagues to consider converting the sentence to life imprisonment. Eshkol argued that keeping Eichmann alive, “with a mark of Cain on his forehead,” would be far more meaningful a punishment than “the five minutes of the carrying-out of the ruling.”

When the cabinet voted, only Yosef Burg, the welfare minister, supported Eshkol’s position, with the other 11 ministers voting for the immediate imposition of the sentence. On that basis, the president rejected the request from Servatius."

Zero^talk 11:55, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Zero0000. So if I am interpreting this correctly, there were thirteen cabinet ministers who voted, with two supporting a life sentence, and eleven supporting a death sentence? — Diannaa (talk) 13:03, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes. Zero^talk 13:11, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I found the 2007 article referred to, which has additional detail. It is here and I mailed it to you. A detail I don't know is whether the Attorney General (Hausner) got a vote; I assume he wasn't a cabinet member but he spoke there. Zero^talk 13:26, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

He was Attorney General and served as the prosecutor at the trial. So it's unlikely he got a vote. If we add something, we could perhaps say that the death sentence received almost unanimous support. — Diannaa (talk) 13:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Actually, reading to the very bottom of the article, it says the decision was unanimous on a second vote. — Diannaa (talk) 14:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

No section on Eichmann in media and culture

I noticed that there is no section listing the depictions of Eichmann in film or TV. This usually occurs for historical figures. I just wanted to make sure it's okay to create one unless this is something that is omitted on purpose. Pearsejward (talk) 10:59, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Please don't. Instead, if there is enough material consider starting a separate article similar to Adolf Hitler in popular culture. But create it in Draft space and be prepared to defend it. Zero^talk 12:26, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

I've discovered a category page here: Category:Cultural depictions of Adolf Eichmann. Could this be added in the See Also section? Is it only Nazis that have their cultural depictions omitted? Pearsejward (talk) 13:46, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll wait for other editors to state their opinions. Zero^talk 14:06, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

For articles on military topics, there's typically no pop culture section (or separate article like there is for Hitler) unless the subject of the article has had a large impact on the culture. SeeWP:MILPOP for details. — Diannaa (talk) 14:35, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Could the category mentioned above be added to the article until a separate article is created? The reason this originally arose because I was reading about Eichmann and was wondering if there were any good films he was depicted in that were worth watching. Pearsejward (talk) 16:04, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Name of executioner

Sorry I didn't mean to edit war, but just because we can source something doesn't mean we should include it. If the name of the executioner were present at the time of the Good Article nomination, I would likely be asked to remove it. It's an interesting tidbit, but has no relevance to Eichmann's life in my opinion. Discussion welcome. This is the edit I removed. Diannaa (talk) 21:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't really consider this edit warring, so we're good.

I don't see how it isn't relevant, it's noted in several reliable sources and is an important historical fact. Heck, there's a whole article on the executioner! Yes the article has an AfD... with its primary reasoning that the info could be included in this article... Ugh.

Anyway, other articles on Nazis and their collaborators include their executioners:

Hans Frank

Joachim von Ribbentrop

Duncan Scott-Ford

Wilhelm Keitel

So with all that in mind... I am a little baffled. Even in the (admintingly old) Ribbentrop article's peer review, the presence of his executor's name is not what is blocking it from GA status. Keitel's article is GA status, and included the executioner's name at the time it was considered a GA. If the executor is notable enough to have an article, if some reliable sources note his name, and the executioner's name doesn't seem to block GA status - why exclude it? Yes, it is a tidbit, but a seemingly relevant and notable one. Carlp941 (talk) 01:22, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

I think that waiting for the AfD to run to completion before doing anything here is the best idea. If that article survives, a wikilink here is appropriate; if not, more discussion is needed. Zero^talk 01:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Looks like the AfD closed with Keep as the consensus.

@Diannaa, what are your thoughts on reverting to having the name added back in? Sorry to ping, I'm just thinking of doing it and wouldn't want to do it without asking. Carlp941 (talk) 17:11, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

The AfD for Shalom Nagar is now complete as a speedy keep. So I think a wikilink in this article is entirely appropriate. To mention just one other example, from UK, Derek Bentley was hanged by Albert Pierrepoint and even his assistant Harry Allen gets a mention in the Bentley article. I'd suggest that this subject is somewhat more notable in world history? Yes, this article is a lot bigger, and the identity of the executioner might seem a little trivial in comparison. But the manner of Eichmann's death was quite significant. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I will add it back now since the consensus is to include. Cheers, Diannaa (talk) 00:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)