Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Königsburg

Not sure what this is supposed to be---can this be turned into an actual stub, or is it nonsense? I can't tell, but I'm leaning toward "someone didn't consider context". Page is an orphan. Grendelkhan 14:44, 2004 May 14 (UTC)

Current content appears to be nonsense with no context. Should this become a redirect to Kaliningrad (which used to be called Königsberg)? Rossami 16:04, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
This was actually a relief -- I thought it was going to be another Russo-German-Polish Edit War like over Gdansk. This one reads like it was intended for a Talk page. Redirect to Kaliningrad, or put it on the author's userpage. Alcarillo 16:31, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if we should redirect -- I think just delete. A simple google for "königsburg" gets you 5,000+ entries, and it appears to me that Kaliningrad isn't the only city formerly named Königsburg (in fact, it looks to me like there's one currently in Krefeld, but someone would have to dig a bit more). If anyone knows more about this, please let me know -- as it stands, I think making the redirect is a bit premature. Jwrosenzweig 16:36, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Kolberg (movie), add the scrap of info on the movie in Kolobrzeg, and list on cleanup. Everyking 19:01, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Everyking in all particulars. Burgundavia 04:11, May 15, 2004 (UTC)
Keep as redirect to Kaliningrad. The Seven Bridges of Königsberg is a historically important mathematical problem. Therefore, some reader might well be looking for an article on "Königsberg" and misspell it. JamesMLane 10:22, 17 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly there should be two entries, one ofr Konigsberg, and one for Kaliningrad. Then the Slav mafia with their hilarious nationalist histories could simply write up the Kaliningrad entry, and educated intellects could complete the Konigsberg site. I see that someone has entered some interesting cultural information on old Konigsberg. ChristchurchChristchurch 14:29, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Now that was offensive and POV. Please refrain yourself from such remarks in the future. Halibu tt 21:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I also think that there could be two separate entries, one for Königsberg 1255-1946, and one for Kaliningrad since 1946. They are two separate cities that have occupied the same site in succession. One did not evolve into the other, the first was violently and suddenly displaced by the second. There was a transition between April 1945 and 1948 as the German population died or were deported, and Soviet settlers replaced them; and more of the physical fabric of Königsberg appears to have survived than is usually acknowledged in English-language writing on the city. Nevertheless the re-naming of 2 July 1946 created, symbolically and in fact, two different cities, with two histories and two peoples, and I think two entries more accurately reflects this. If one entry is retained, I think that references to the city before 1946 should read Königsberg, and after 1946 Kaliningrad. These are the only two names the city has been referred to in English-language writings. I think that an example of the confusion that can arise without resolving this is the illustration of the Coat of Arms of Königsberg in the article, heraldically correct but labelled with Polish-language place names. That may be the practice in Polish-language usage, but all English-language references I can find to the city's Coat of Ams and its history use the same place names as in the German language. If there is a historical source to cite for the use of Polish-language place names to describe Königsberg's Coat of Arms for English-language speakers, I would be interested to see it. Kaliningrad has its own heraldic history, and has never used the Arms of Königsberg. Brucehassan 12:38, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am wrong. The Coat of Arms in the article isn't even heraldically correct! The three municipal shields are supported by a white Polish eagle when it should be a black Prussian eagle. The present Arms of Kaliningrad incorporate the central shield into a design featuring a sailing ship. They could be interpreted as an allusion to a continuity with old Königsberg, or may be seen as an attempt to appropriate the municpal legitimacy of the pre-1946 city. Either way, the Coat of Arms of 'Królewiec' shown in the article don't seem to have any legitimacy. Brucehassan 13:29, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The German-language and Russian-language Wikipedia both have separate articles for Königsberg and for Kaliningrad. I think that further supports the case for two separate articles in English. Any thoughts? Brucehassan 11:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just stumbled upon this because I was both confused and offended by the lack of a separate page for Königsberg. I have no idea if anyone will ever read this or if my commenting will have any effect, but as a German-American whose family lived in Königsberg for 300 years, I can tell you that I've never met anyone who thought of Kaliningrad as the same city as Königsberg. WWII destroyed the old city both physically and culturally so it does not make sense to have a search for one lead to an entry on the other. Moreover, Wikipedia has double entries for all the different incarnations of the Prussian state (Duchy, Province, etc.) and those were all natural progressions, so why not have an entry for the one change that was clearly not natural?Nsfreeman 17:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]