Talk:Stierlitz

Spelling

What is the deal with the spelling of the name Stirlitz? I see three different versions. eae 06:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it should be under "Stierlitz", as it spells properly in the first paragraph: "Otto von Stierlitz (rusky Штирлиц)" and in czech language of Wikipedia itself http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stierlitz. I wanted to edit the entire article (substitute Stirlitz with Stierlitz), but then still would need to change the header to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stierlitz, and I don't know how to do it or request it. Someone who knows should do that. Thanks User:Michael Borodin 21:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Shtirlits would be the usual transcription. Stierlitz would look the most like a German name. However, I believe the standard English rendering is "Stirlitz." This can be verified in Routledge Encyclopedia of Contemporary Russian Culture (ed. Smorodinskaya, 2006) which has an article on Stirlitz (the proofs did at least, I have not yet seen the final product).

In the first episode of the series his personal file is shown. His name is spelled there as "von Stierlitz, Max Otto"

I've just changed the article name to Stierlitz and have updated all the links accordingly. I've just checked the first episode, and can confirm that the personal file says "Stierlitz" and not "Stirlitz", which also wouldn't look very German. It's obvious that the very common use of "Stirlitz" comes from conventional transcription from Russian, which normally drops silent letters when transliterating from Latin characters to Cyrillic. A typical example is the author Henry Fielding, who's name in Russian becomes Генри Филдинг. If you transliterate that back into Latin characters, you get Genri Filding. So, "Stirlitz" is a mistake and not what the creators of the series had written when they wrote it in German - they wrote "Stierlitz". Incidentally, "Stierlitz" is also how his name is written in German Wikipedia. Thomas Blomberg (talk) 15:35, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Stirlitz after '45??

Umm the article says "Years later when Stirlitz returned to Russia he was arrested by forces sympathetic to Beria. Stalin's death saved Stirlitz from the gulag." What is this referring to? In the series, we do not know this. We aren't even sure if he survives the war (this might be hinted though). And it cannot be referring to the real man Stirlitz, because, there was none (so far as I know, at least). I am going to remove this for the meantime.

Similarly: "He spoke all European languages except Irish and Albanian. He favored the intellectual approach over violence and is believed to have killed only one time in his fifty year career as an agent." I don't believe anything about what languages Stirlitz speaks is ever mentioned in the show (I just watched it last week). Is this again a reference to the "real Stirlitz"? I won't edit this for now.

We also know that Stirlitz has been working in Germany for twenty years. Since he is around fifty in the show, I am not sure how we can know that he has a fifty-year career as an agent. True, he only kills once in the show, but we have no way of knowing that this is the only time he has killed in his career, nor that his career is to last thirty years more. I also won't edit this for now in case I'm just missing something.

This info is based on (not referenced) later works of Semenov. For further explanation, see Russian Wiki article --Bicycle repairman 01:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I don`t speak English very vell, but i can say, that:

1) Shtirlitz killed more, than one man;

2) He was alive after WWII.

You may write this. Штирлиц 1997.02 (talk) 17:35, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

KGB before 1954

I think the article should be revised. KGB existed 1954-1991, not during the WWII.

"This particular scenario, and others similar to it, since it was made in the Cold War, was more propaganda than anything else, as though the Western Allies did allow some high-ranking Nazi members into the West, it should be noted that the Soviets did much the same thing to a greater extent, and the Allies were adament in destroying organizations fanatical to the Nazis"

"though the Western Allies did allow some high-ranking Nazi members into the West, it should be noted that the Soviets did much the same thing to a greater extent" - proof needed. The USSR only used German scientists and prisoners of war to rebuild the country that had been devastated by Germans. On the other hand, the West helped several high-ranking Nazis (Walter Schellenberg included) escape the justice.

This part seems to be biased a bit. Especially the phrase that the Soviets allowed some high-ranking Nazi members into the East to a GREATER EXTENT. What's the purpose of this line in the first place? I believe there is no need to start once again this dispute about who won the war and who is more righteous when telling about this wonderful movie.

I adjusted it slightly. It's NKVD before KGB. --RossF18 (talk) 03:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Stirlitz was the agent of Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU), not of NKVD nor KGB. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.34.226.33 (talk) 11:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

No, he was agent of Sovetical political spy-center (NKGB), no army spy-center! Штирлиц 1997.02 (talk) 17:37, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

"He is presented in a deeply patriotic, but not ideological light, fighting to defend the Soviet homeland from external enemies, and not just defending the communist government from its ideological opponents." Well, you can do the first and second at once and together, because these things do not seem to contradict each other Цйфыву (talk) 18:27, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Stirlitz.jpg

Image:Stirlitz.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)