Place talk:Germany


For the WeRelate:Place review

The following historical places of Prussia are now located in Germany (1945-1952)
Place:Brandenburg, Preußen + 742 contained places, some Poland
Place:Pommern, Preußen + 705 contained places, some Poland
Place:Schlesien, Preußen + 1737 contained places, most to Poland
Place:West Prussia, Prussia + 834 contained places, some Poland
Place:Schleswig-Holstein, Preußen + 385 contained places, some Denmark
Place:Hannover, Preußen + all contained places
Place:Hessen-Nassau, Preußen + all contained places
Place:Hohenzollern, Preußen + all contained places
Place:Rheinland, Preußen + all contained places
Place:Sachsen, Preußen + all contained places
Place:Westfalen, Preußen + all contained places
Place:Mecklenburg-Schwerin, Germany + all contained places

(1990) Place:Deutsche Demokratische Republik, Germany + all contained places

Other historical places with contained places
(1952) Place:Baden: all 1262 contained places to Place:Baden-Württemberg
(1952) Place:Württemberg, Baden-Württemberg: all 1735 contained places to Place:Baden-Württemberg

(2004) Regierungsbezirke removed from hierarchy of Place:Saxony-Anhalt, leaving 21 districts as the primary divisions of the state:
district moves complete, Place:Halle (region), Saxony-Anhalt complete
still to do: contained places in Place:Dessau (region), Saxony-Anhalt & Place:Magdeburg (region), Saxony-Anhalt.

(2007) 21 counties of Place:Saxony-Anhalt reorganized to only 11 counties and 3 independent cities: re-assignments complete. Ref:

(2004) Regierungsbezirke removed from hierarchy of Place:Lower Saxony, leaving districts as the primary divisions of the state:
Place:Braunschweig (region), Lower Saxony, Place:Hanover, Lower Saxony, Place:Lüneburg, Lower Saxony, Place:Weser-Ems, Lower Saxony - contained places still to be moved.

--Bgwiehle 14:28, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Holy Roman Empire terms [9 February 2009]

There were freehold lands under the emperor during the period of the Holy Roman Empire. A baron who owned these lands was called "Freiherr" (Free Lord). Does anyone know what the term is for the land and town itself? In other words, a baron owns his barony, so what does a freiherr own? Wikipedia article: Freiherr -- Parsa 23:31, 9 February 2009 (EST)

Proposal for Dealing with Jurisdictional Changes in Germany [31 July 2009]

Germany has experienced many changes in the jurisdictional locations of its towns, cities, counties (kreis) and states (stadt; former kingdoms). Genealogy practice is to record the name of the location as it was called at the time of the event or as it is worded on the original document. Wiki practice is to link to the current location (and hence name) of the place.

How do we resolve the discrepancies that no doubt arise from this? Let's look at the overall guidance on the WeRelate Help pages (specifically Help:Places):

How do I title places with jurisdictional changes?
Suppose you have a place that used to be located in one place but is now located in another. For instance, Ravenswood, Mason, Virginia is now Place:Ravenswood, Jackson, West Virginia, United States. In this instance, Jackson County has now been cut out of the early Mason County and after 1863 that area of Virginia became part of the new West Virginia.
We recommend that you list the place as "Ravenswood, Mason, Virginia, United States" since that's where the event took place, but that you link to Place:Ravenswood, Jackson, West Virginia, United States since that's the current name of the place. In addition, it would be nice if you edit the Place pages involved to tell others about the place movement:
  • * Edit Place:Ravenswood, Jackson, West Virginia, United States and add "Mason, West Virginia, United States" as an also-located-in place.
  • Edit Place:Mason, West Virginia, United States and add Virginia as an "also-located-in" place.
If you do this, then future GEDCOM uploads will automatically link "Ravenswood, Mason, Virginia" to Place:Ravenswood, Jackson, West Virginia, United States.

BUT! The Place page for Germany says THIS:

The standard at WeRelate is to title German places according to their former (German Empire) state when it is known, with also-located-in links to the modern state when it is known.

Based on this, we would create a page for the current location, as now named and located. Let's use Villingen-Schwenningen as an example:

  • Initially two towns, in two separate states (then kingdoms): Villingen was in Catholic Baden; Schwenningen was in Protestant Wurttemberg.
  • First the kingdoms merged to become a single state (stadt): Baden-Wurttemberg.
  • Then the two towns were administratively merged to Villingen-Schwenningen, although they are geographically and socially distinct.
  • The LDS has films for the distinct towns, in separate states.
  • There is now a "kreis" (something like a county) in between the town name and the state name; in the case of Villingen and Schwenningen, they are each (and together) in Schwarzwald-Baar-Kreis
  • On maps today, one can look them up separately as well as well together.


  1. Villingen-Schwenningen, Schwarzwald-Baar-Kreis, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany [located in Schwarzwald-Baar-Kreis]
  2. Villingen, Baden, Germany [also located in #1]
  3. Schwenningen, Wurttemberg, Germany [also located in #1]

Okay? Da?

jillaine 13:15, 28 July 2009 (EDT)

I think I had this discussion in the watercooler. Personally I think the first rule you stated for the US should apply universally. That is that the cited place should be the one contemporary with the event, and that it should link to the current location. Why would an event that occurred before the German empire have to cite a place name from approximately 1900? That makes no sense to me. - Parsa 13:40, 28 July 2009 (EDT)

So then, I think, Steven/Parsa, that what you would do is this:

Let's say that the document was from Schwenningen prior to its merger with Villingen:

[[Place:Villingen-Schwenningen, Schwarzwald-Baar Kreis, Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany|Schwenningen, Wuerttemberg, Germany]]

(But replace the "ue" with an umlauted "u". I'm on my numeric-keypad-less laptop and don't know how to generate that.)

This way, when one clicks on the link it will go to the current town, but will visually remain the original name on your page.

But this conflicts with what I've been told elswhere, which is to create separate Place pages for the historic names-- one each for Villingen and Schwenningen.

Still confused,

jillaine 15:43, 28 July 2009 (EDT)

Just as an FYI, most places in the US are titled according to their modern jurisdiction and most places in Germany are titled according to their 1900 jurisdiction because that's how they are listed in the family history library catalog, which was the source of most of the place names.

That said, I like using 1900 for Germany because things were relatively stable for awhile (until WWI), and it's around the time when most beginners would start their genealogical research. So when they see a place named "Baden" in their records, they'll also see a page called "Baden" in the place wiki -- the idea that places changed jurisdictions over time won't cause them a brain cramp until they've matured in their genealogical competency.

BTW, a practical problem with using modern jurisdictions for Europe is that jurisdictions in many European countries have changed dramatically over the past couple of decades and are continuing to change due to the introduction of the EU. Continually renaming pages in the place wiki to keep it up to date with current place jurisdictions would be a lot of work. Another practical problem with using modern jurisdictions is that the majority of places in Germany are currently listed under their historical jurisdictions. Renaming all of those places to their modern jurisdictions would also be a lot of work. So I'd stick with your original approach.

Also BTW, I realize that it's a huge project, but I hope over time that people will eventually list places in Germany under their kreis's. But that's a huge task, and there are more important projects right now.--Dallan 22:32, 28 July 2009 (EDT)

Okay, let me see if I can get clear enough to move forward.

For the purposes of the Stadts, you want us to use the 1900 status.

For the purposes of the kreis, you want us to use the current status.

No, sorry - I mean to use the 1900 status for the Kreis's as well. You can leave off the Kreis's if you don't know them, but for places that existed in 1900, we should list them under the 1900 Kreis if we know them (not the current Kreis). We can add the modern Kreis's as also-located-in places if you want.--Dallan 23:35, 30 July 2009 (EDT)

So that would translate to:

  1. Villingen, Schwarzwald-Baar-Kreis, Baden, Germany
  2. Schwenningen, Schwarzwald-Baar-Kreis, Wurttemberg, Germany

Both of these pages should also, then, have the Also-located-in field as:

  • Villingen-Schwenningen, Schwarzwald-Barr-Kreis, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany

And lastly, can we come to a decision about Germany vs. DE?

Can you tell me what you mean? Do you mean whether we should use Germany or Deutschland? The history (I know it's not consistent) is to title places using the English-language name for the country, and the native-language name for the other jurisdictional levels.--Dallan 23:35, 30 July 2009 (EDT)

Thanks, Dallan.

-- Jillaine--jillaine 07:31, 29 July 2009 (EDT)

Okay, while I *think* I can live with Germany vs. DE (I really think it's a bad idea; I think names should be native-- i.e., German locations should be in German; France in French, etc.), I will have a great deal of difficulty with 1900 Kreis. I have no idea what Kreis it was then-- if there was a Kreis. Which means, I'm more likely not to use any Kreis at all. This will make it difficult to distinguish the two different Schwenningens in Wuerttemberg (unless I use Schwenningen am Neckar).

Ugh this is a mess.

Dallan, that spreadsheet I sent you (which is also available at Germany regions is current delineations, not 1900.

-- jillaine 09:22, 31 July 2009 (EDT)

Everything except the country name should be in the native language. Hopefully the country names being in English won't mess people up too much. "Deutchland" is an alternate name for Germany, so someone entering "Baden, Deutchland" would match Place:Baden, Germany.

Regarding Kreis's, just leave them out of the titles. We can list the modern Kreis's as also-located-in places. But titling a place according to the Stadt it was in in 1900 but the Kreis it is in today would be pretty confusing I think, and not that helpful to people doing genealogical research.

I'd call your Schwenningen just by the name of Schwenningen and list Schwenningen am Neckar as an alternate name. Regarding the second Schwenningen in Wuerttemberg, it appears to be two separate hamlets according to the German Wikipedia. I don't know how important it is to create place pages for these hamlets, since a hamlet appears to be a lower-level jurisdiction than a municipality and the German Wikipedia doesn't have entries for them. But if you wanted to create a place for it anyway, you could two place pages titled "Schwenningen (Neul), Württemberg, Germany" and "Schwenningen (Rainau), Württemberg, Germany", or break the rules in this case and create a single place titled Place:Schwenningen, Ostalbkreis, Württemberg, Germany and just note in the text of the page that it's listed under Ostalbkreis because we don't know where it was in 1900, and that today it appears to be two separate hamlets, one in Neul and one in Rainau.--Dallan 10:45, 31 July 2009 (EDT)

Okay, I'll set about to cleaning up the Schwenningen pages. Ah... the rain finally started. We so need it. My yard is thirsty. jillaine 13:43, 31 July 2009 (EDT)

Fixing Schwenningen et al [31 July 2009]

I just want to document what I'm about to do.

  1. In December 2007, the "werelate agent" changed the name of/redirected Place:Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden-Württemberg to Place:Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden, Germany. Not sure why it did this. It's incorrect; there was never a Villingen-Schwenningen in BADEN. It should have changed it to Place:Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany (i.e., just added the word Germany to the end).
  2. Therefore I will change the name of Place:Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden, Germany to Place:Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. Unfortunately, this will result in a number of multiple redirects.
  3. I will therefore then go through the list of all places that link to all the variations we've had on this darn town, and clean them up.

What Links to...

Place:Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden, Germany

  1. Place:Baden, Germany
  2. Place:Donaueschingen, Baden, Germany
  3. Place:Schwarzwald-Baar-Kreis, Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
  4. Place:Furtwangen, Baden, Germany
  5. Place:Biberach an der Riß, Baden, Germany
  6. Place:Schwenningen, Württemberg, Germany
  7. Place:Fischbach, Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden, Germany
  8. Place:Kappel, Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden, Germany
  9. Place:Neuhausen, Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden, Germany
  10. Place:Pfaffenweiler, Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden, Germany
  11. Place:Schönenbach, Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden, Germany
  12. Place:Weiler, Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden, Germany
  13. Place:Schwenningen, Bayern, Germany
  14. Source:Wappenbuch des Landkreises Villingen
  15. Source:Kirchenbuch, 1862-1962 (202902)
  16. Source:Kirchenbuch, 1914-1946 (203166)
  17. Source:Kirchenbuch, 1576-1900
  18. Source:Kirchenbuch, 1799-1801 (443468)
  19. Source:Kirchenbuch, 1793-1799
  20. Source:Kirchenbuch, 1799-1801 (495730)
  21. Source:Kirchenbuch, 1813-1814 (495888)
  22. Source:Kirchenbuch, 1815 (495903)
  23. Source:Kirchenbuch, 1799-1801 (495906)
  24. Source:Kirchenbuch, 1799-1801 (495912)
  25. Source:Adreßbuch der Kreishauptstadt und des Amtsbezirkes Villingen
  26. Source:Kartei
  27. Template:Wp-Donaueschingen
  28. Template:Wp-Furtwangen im Schwarzwald
  29. Template:Wp-Biberach an der Riß-History
  30. Place:Balingen, Balingen, Württemberg, Germany
  31. Template:Wp-Balingen
  32. User:Jillaine/Understanding WeRelate
  33. Tracking the Emigres of Schwenningen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
  34. Our Schwenningen Ancestors
  35. Image:YauchJacobPaintingUSE.jpg
  36. Image:Schwenningen Banner.jpg

Place:Villingen-Schwenningen, Baden-Württemberg (previous redirect page)

  • Person:Andreas Schlenker (1)
  • Person:Agathe Schlenker (1)
  • Person:Agnes Otto (1)
  • Person:Agnes Jauch (2)
  • Person:Agnes Jauch (4)
  • Person:Agatha Benzing (1)
  • Person:Andreas Haller (3)
  • Family:Christian Jauch and Maria Glunz (1)
  • Family:Andreas Schlenker and Sophia Haller (1)
  • Family:Johannes Jauch and Maria Schneckenburger (1)
  • Family:Mathias Schlenker and Maria Jaeckle (1)
  • Family:Andreas Jauch and Agnes Otto (1)
  • Family:Hanss Jauch and Agathe Schlenker (1)
  • Family:Georg Otto and Maria Rapp (1)
  • Family:Christian Benzing and Margaretha Mueller (1)
  • Family:Erhardt Schlenker and Agatha Benzing (1)
  • Family:Johannes Haller and Catharina Benzing (1)
  • User talk:Bgwiehle

Place:Schwenningen, Baden-Württemberg (which is redirected to Place:Schwenningen, Württemberg, Germany)

  • Person:Ludwig Jauch (1)
  • Person:Anna Birk (1)
  • Person:Agnes Weiler (1)
  • Person:Andreas Jauch (1)
  • Person:Rosina Jaeckle (1)
  • Person:Maria Schlenker (1)
  • Person:Andreas Jauch (3)
  • Person:Johannes Jauch (1)
  • Person:Johannes Jaeckle (1)
  • Person:Anna Jauch (1)
  • Person:Katharina Jauch (1)
  • Person:Jakob Jauch (1)
  • Person:Maria Jauch (2)
  • Person:Catharina Jauch (1)
  • Person:Michael Jauch (2)
  • Person:Hanss Jauch (2)
  • Person:Catharina Mueller (35)
  • Person:Catharina Jauch (2)
  • Person:Anna Jauch (2)
  • Person:Christian Jauch (1)
  • Person:Johannes Jauch (4)
  • Person:Jakob Jauch (3)
  • Person:Christina Jauch (1)
  • Person:Johannes Jauch (5)
  • Person:Andreas Jauch (4)
  • Person:Christian Jauch (2)
  • Person:Martin Jauch (3)
  • Person:Katharina Jauch (2)
  • Person:Andreas Jauch (5)
  • Person:Ursula Jauch (2)
  • Person:Catharina Jauch (3)
  • Person:Maria Jauch (7)
  • Person:Agathe Jauch (1)
  • Person:Anna Jauch (5)
  • Person:Anna Jauch (6)
  • Person:Elisabetha Stengle (1)
  • Family:Andreas Jauch and Rosina Jaeckle (1)
  • Family:Peter Gluntz and Anna Birk (1)
  • Family:Christian Buerk and Anna Schlenker (1)
  • Family:Johannes Glunz and Agnes Weiler (1)
  • Family:Joseph Weiler and Maria Haller (1)
  • Family:Christian Jauch and Maria Glunz (1)
  • Family:Andreas Jauch and Maria Schlenker (1)
  • Family:Ludwig Jaeckle and Annastasia Wuerthner (1)
  • Family:Johannes Jaeckle and Elisabetha Stengle (1)
  • Family:Andreas Schlenker and Sophia Haller (1)
  • Family:Johannes Jauch and Maria Schneckenburger (1)
  • Family:Johannes Jauch and Ursula Vosseler (1)
  • Family:Andreas Jauch and Agnes Otto (1)
  • Family:Johannes Jaeckle and Katharina Jauss (1)
  • Family:Johannes Wuerthner and Anna Jauch (1)
  • Family:Martin Jauch and Maria Link (1)
  • Family:Jakob Jauch and Catharina Mueller (1)
  • Family:Hanss Jauch and Catharina Kohler (1)
  • Family:Martin Mueller and Anna Rapp (1)
  • Family:Martin Link and Anna Schueler (1)
  • Family:Johannes Stengle and Elisabetha Irion (1)
  • Family:Johannes Jauch and Magdalena Strohm (1)
  • Family:Johannes Jauch and Anna Schlenker (1)
  • Family:Christian Schlenker and Katharina Jauch (1)

I'm leaving alone (for now):

  • Place:Schwenningen, Baden, Germany I don't know where this one is. It contains Catholic records, so it's clearly distinct from Schwenningen am Neckar (unless the records are signicantly later-- i.e., 20th century).

jillaine 14:42, 31 July 2009 (EDT)

Yes, the agent made a mistake. After looking at this, here's what I'd suggest:

--Dallan 15:38, 31 July 2009 (EDT)

Disambiguating towns with the same name in the same stadt [31 July 2009]

Most towns in Germany are listed directly under the stadt (state) because the kreis (county) is unknown. This means that different towns with the same name in the same stadt result in the same Place page title. But in a wiki, each town needs to have a different title. Here's what to do if you come across this situation:

  • If you know the kreis that the town was in around 1900, title the Place page as: town, kreis, stadt, Germany.
  • If you don't know the 1900 kreis, title the Place page using the town's modern kreis (but still use the historical stadt): town, modern kreis, stadt, Germany. Leave a message on the page asking someone to rename the town to put it into its historical kreis if they know it.

--Dallan 16:21, 31 July 2009 (EDT)

Clarification on Place Page Naming re: Jurisdictional Changes [26 okt 2013]

From what I have read here and on the Poland place page, it appears that places that were in Prussia in 1900 and became part of Poland in 1945 should be named as being in Preußen, Germany (with "also located in" to indicate where they currently exist). I assume this means they should also use their German name (e.g., German Bischofsburg rather than the Polish Biskupiec). That means that if the two pages:

represent the same place (and I am pretty sure they do), then I should copy all pertinent info from the former to the latter and redirect the former to the latter.

However, that also means that the place page for Gdansk should not be Place:Gdańsk, Pomorze, Poland, but should be Place:Danzig, Danzig-Stadt, Westpreußen, Preußen, Germany, and the place page for Elblag should not be Place:Elbląg, Warmińsko-Mazurskie, Poland, but should be Place: Elbing, Elbing-Stadt, Westpreußen, Preußen, Germany. Somehow, I don't think that is likely to happen.

I'm in a bit of a quandary. I am working on Mennonite village names and plan to add them to Place:Westpreußen, Preußen, Germany if they do not already exist. I prefer to use the Prussian designation, since the villages were definitely German-speaking and some probably did not survive until the area was returned to Poland in 1945. However, with the pages listed above, my inclination is to keep the "Poland" version of the page and to redirect Place:Bischofsburg, Ostpreußen, Preußen, Germany to Place:Biskupiec, Biskupiec, Olsztyn, Poland instead of the other way around (mostly because it is much easier to find out what administrative district villages are in today than what they were in 1900).

Does anyone have any advice, or has it become a matter of each person using their own judgment?--DataAnalyst 21:19, 19 October 2013 (UTC) Tekst volgt nog/Text will follow--Lidewij 20:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I have decided to leave the 2 major Polish city place pages alone (Gdansk and Elblag) but to keep the Preußen, Germany place pages for villages and towns, and to merge the Polish place pages into the Preußen, Germany place pages. I have found various sources that help me to identify the Kreis of most of the villages and towns, which helps. As far as I can tell, this seems to be the most consistent approach with WeRelate practice.

BTW: As I have been doing this, I have found 2 or 3 errors in the Family History Library Catalogue in mapping a German place name to a Polish place name (always when there was more than one village with the same name). I am pretty sure that the sources I am using are more reliable than the FHLC, especially since I have confirmation from 2 sources in one case, and the FHLC itself is inconsistent in another case. This is just in case someone comes along to "correct" my corrections, based on FHLC - FHLC is not always right.--DataAnalyst 00:08, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

DataAnalyst, Sorry it took a while
I have read several times your contribution, to understand you well. I had the English language at school, it's never been my language. I can still use it to save me. I'm dyslexic
I am 100% behind the places of note in 1900 and would like to maintain here.
Also how the places listed/noted here I find a right decision. A note of the sources of the Mormons, buggy the human effort. And a place name from the Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names recently (even with errors).
The sites are noted at the top as in 1900, the other views have a redirect to 1900. Will ultimately the people born in the same city under what links here will be a list.
For there is no chaos of it, I think first half and all places must remain linked to each other. At the time when an entire region is selected can be made to the redirection. The problem is there for all of Eastern Europe. See also
Before a region can be edited there should be proper maps sought. My experience is that the Polish wikipedia can help very well. When necessary I can a fellow genealogist that the Polish language is able to help out. I am glad that the German name at the top of the page, German language lessons I got at school to. Groetjes,--Lidewij 10:10, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
(DataAnalyst, Sorry het duurde even.
Ik heb je bijdrage meerdere keren gelezen, om je goed te kunnen begrijpen . Ik kreeg de Engelse taal op school, het is nooit mijn taal geworden . Ik kan me er wel mee redden. Ik ben dyslectisch
Ik sta 100% achter de plaatsnamen notitie van 1900 en wil dat graag ook hier handhaven.
Ook hoe de plaatsnamen hier genoteerd staan vind ik een juiste beslissing. Eén notitie via de bronnen van de Mormonen, met fouten het blijft mensen werk. En plaats note via de Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names recentelijk (ook met fouten).
De plaatsen worden bovenaan genoteerd als in 1900, de andere weergaven moeten een redirect worden naar 1900. Uiteindelijk zullen de personen die in de zelfde stad geboren zijn onder wat linkt hier op één lijst komen.
Om er geen chaos van te maken denk ik dat eerst alle plaatsen dubbel en gelinkt naar elkaar moeten blijven bestaan. Op het moment dat een hele regio uitgezocht is kunnen de redirect worden gemaakt. Het probleem is er voor heel Oost Europa. Zie ook
Voordat een regio bewerkt kan worden moeten juiste kaarten gezocht worden. Mijn ervaring is dat de Poolse wikipedia heel goed kan helpen. Wanneer het nodig is kan ik een medegenealoog die de Poolse taal machtig is vragen te helpen. Zelf ben ik blij dat de Duitse naam boven aan de pagina staat, die taallessen kreeg ik ook op school. Groetjes --Lidewij 10:10, 26 October 2013 (UTC))