Talk:Anschluss

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Anschluss article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2: 3 months

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Anschluss is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 21, 2005.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 19, 2005	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
May 23, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
June 16, 2005	Featured article candidate	Promoted
June 26, 2005	Featured article review	Kept
April 10, 2010	Featured article review	Demoted
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 12, 2005, March 12, 2006, March 12, 2007, March 12, 2008, and March 12, 2009.
Current status: Former featured article

Austria High‑importance

	Austria portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Austria, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles about Austria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.AustriaWikipedia:WikiProject AustriaTemplate:WikiProject AustriaAustria
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

International relations High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

European history High‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ambiguity about March 13 referendum

I think that the current article is far too ambiguous about what happened to the referendum Kurt Schuschnigg planned for March 13.

Under "Schuschnigg announces a referendum," the article says "In the face of [Hitler's] threat, Schuschnigg informed Seyss-Inquart that the plebiscite would be cancelled."

But was the plebiscite ACTUALLY cancelled, or was this a lie to Seyss-Inquart to buy some time? As far as I can tell, the article does not make any unambiguous statements about whether or not the plebiscite actually went ahead or was cancelled for real.

What makes the matter even more confusing is a line under "Referendum" (which is referring to the April 10 Nazi referendum): "In some remote areas of Austria, people voted to preserve the independence of Austria on 13 March (in Schuschnigg's planned but cancelled referendum) despite the Wehrmacht's presence. For instance, in the village of Innervillgraten, a majority of 95% voted for Austria's independence."

If the referendum "was cancelled", as the text states, then how could 95% of Innervillgraten's residents vote for independence? It's a contradiction of terms: if the referendum was cancelled, then people couldn't have voted. Or if people voted, then there WAS a referendum.

The only explanation I can imagine is that the act of voting was not cancelled, and went ahead with people gathering at polling locations and casting votes, but the results of the plebiscite were never actually implemented. But if that is what happened, than I don't think that can be reasonably called a "cancellation."

The bottom line is, some parts of the article should be rewritten to explicitly, unambiguously and non-self-contradictingly state what exactly happened or did not happen on March 13 with Schuschnigg's referendum. Arrowgrab (talk) 15:17, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Austrian support for Anschluss

This article suggests that support for Anschuluss amongst Austrians was low, while the Austria victim theory article says that support was high. Is there a modern consensus? 2600:6C50:1900:E9:3DE3:94A0:53D2:B910 (talk) 05:45, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only 20% of Austrians would have supported in a fair referendum claim

20% only in support claim

Currently the article states:

In case of a fair referendum, the Anschluss would have been supported only by 20% of the Austrian population.

The two sources for the claim are Peter Knaur (1951), The International Relations of Austria and the Anschluss 1931–1938 on page 370 and Joachim von Halas (1938). Adolf Hitler from speeches 1933-1938, Terramare Office. page 23.

The first source is not available to view on Google books and I can’t seem to get a view of it online anywhere. Who added that source and what does it say on page 320? The second source says nothing at all about only 20% allegedly supporting the Anschluss. That book is available on the Internet Archive and on page 23 it is about a speech given by Adolf Hitler and his claims about reaching out to the Chancellor of Austria Kurt Schuschnigg.

QueenCoatsie (talk) 10:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]