Talk:Maria Mandl

Last Words

Were Mandel's last words "long live Poland!" as the text claims? Surely it would have been Long Live Germany!

Last Words

A number of German sources on the internet indicate that Mandel did, indeed, say "long live Poland!" prior to execution, strange as it may seem.

Some odd black-humor, i belive.

Last Words

The current text (2008 June 16 at 20h10 CDT) indicates nothing of what Mandl said before her execution. But it was surely the English equivalent of "Love Live Poland!" Her motivation possibly arose from an implicit emphasis on postwar Poland which was almost totally bereft of Jews, because of her, the Schutzstaffeln, and the indigenous anti-Jewish Fifth Column. To have said "Love live Germany" would have been trite, virtually a cliché which would have contributed merely a fleeting insult against the earlier Poland she identified with her deranged labors of ethnic cleansing. Her last words "Love Live Poland!" continue so shamelessly provocative and ring true to the continuing international character of virulent antisemitism. Richard David Ramsey 01:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

typo in name

hi there,

i am 100% sure that maria mandl´s name is misspelled in most of the articles about her - possibly due to an false transscription during her trial. i am native of münzkirchen, austria, and the mandl (without e) family still live there - my mother got to know maria mandl at school. does anybody think it`s worth correcting his orthographic error after so many years?

see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Mandel

and the discussion there for details

Indeed, her official name was Mandl:

• 
  Receipt from 1942, with her name typed and signed "Mandl", not "Mandel"
• 
  Attestation by the mayor of her place of birth, with her surname as well as her father's surname spelled "Mandl", not "Mandel"

There also an Austrian legal document from 1976 that spells her name "Mandl".

However, US troops arrested her and she was extradited to Poland. They probably spelled her name incorrectly in their official documents, so, wrong as that may be, that's how Americans may want to spell it. It certainly was on the sign that she carries on one of the pictures. The policy is Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people). Wammes Waggel (talk) 13:51, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Photo

The article hasn't a photo of this criminal.This site: [] has a photo of this mad austrian.Agre22 (talk) 21:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC)agre22

Not possible to have signed orders

"She signed orders sending an estimated half a million women and children to their deaths in the gas chambers at Auschwitz I and II."

Apparently she wouldn't have been in a position high enough to have signed such an order and also for the mere fact of being a woman. There is also an issue with the attributed numbers since that would be roughly half of the death toll. Whoever wrote this either misinterpreted the cited book or the book is wrong. Where is the evidence like the copy of these orders?

This sentence should be entirely removed if it cannot be further clarified or supported with evidence.

-- The Polish court convicted her of 500,000 deaths, whether that was accurate or not. Obviously they should have charged the doctors responsible for selections, such as Mengele. 96.25.175.176 (talk) 13:54, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Totalitarian show trials are not a reliable source anyway. So there should be citation from more independent sources on this. As US Armed Forces arrested her, reliable documents from this side should exist in relevant archives. 205.56.210.194 (talk) 07:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

FWIW there are copies of documents available showing she signed them; I don't know the numbers, just that she could and did sign off these lists of people and is also reported to have participated in the selections along with other Aufseherinnen who were apparently a common sight. Just a FYI rather than making a case that it should be in the article as I don't really want to get into the whole "women were too unimportant to be in the SS" debate which is now just presumed to be historical fact, unfortunately. --Vometia (talk) 13:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

"Pets"?

"She reportedly often chose so-called "pet" Jews for herself, keeping them from the gas chamber for a time until she tired of them, then sending them to their deaths."

It sounds like she used them as sexual partners/slaves. Or something else? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.184.83.234 (talk) 12:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Polish error?

She couldn't have ordered the death of 500,000 people. She was a guard. The nazi doctors were the ones who gave the order for the zyklon B gas to be administered.74.239.209.92 (talk) 07:48, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

She was a high-level administrator in the Birkenau women's camp, subordinate only to the camp commandant. See her position in the article. -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:22, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

I believe footnote (2) - Jewish Virtual Library - is used for the 500,000 number. However, the JVL article never mentions a number. The Polish trials were "show" trials. Their numbers were invented as needed. 2601:181:8301:4510:98B6:290A:3912:880D (talk) 02:35, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Totalitarian administrations have a strict hierarchy. There should be more precise citation on this exception, as the relevant criminal commands had to be given from higher levels. So maybe, she rather coordinated the assassinations on an administrative level, while high ranking staff gave the actual orders. 143.81.103.26 (talk) 07:25, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Maria Mandl/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Angelita dela Rosa (talk · contribs) 21:44, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Grumpylawnchair (talk · contribs) 02:09, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'll start this review in the next few days. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 02:09, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you so much for your time. No rush!

I do want to note that I am "Angelita dela Rosa", I had just changed my username to "Staniulis". — Staniulis^TALK 12:29, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Concerns:

Hi! I'm sorry for taking this long. Some personal issues came up and I didn't have much time for Wikipedia these last few days.

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	See below Fixed.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	All tagged with appropriate public domain tags
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Lead:

• Wikilink "Holocaust"
• Lead strikes me as a bit too short, maybe add something about her cruelty towards the inmates? And some stuff from the "Employment in concentration camps" could probably be used in the lede too.

Early life:

• Maria would later recall, Probably should be a colon there instead of the comma
• I see that all the info in this section are based off one book, which is not ideal. Is there any way you could add another source? It's not a criteria for failure if you can't.
• put down the money could probably be reworded to "paid"
• returned home when her parents’ health began to decline "after" instead of "when" would sound a lot more natural here
• significant dates in the Nazi Party could probably be reworded to "dates significant to the Nazi Party" or "significant dates of the Nazi Party" for clarity
• What are "global matters"?
• Please define "Oberaufseherin" and "Kommandant" in the article text or consider wikilinking them (preferably both) for non-German speakers

Trial:

• Is it known how Mandl learnt Polish, considering she's from Austria?
• "Echo Krakowa" should be italicized, since it is a magazine

References review to follow....
Overall a very well written article, and you should be proud, especially since this is your first GAN (its way better than my first). Grumpylawnchair (talk) 03:15, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh no, please don't worry! I sincerely hope all is well. Thank you so much for taking the time to review this article and for your kind words—it genuinely means a lot.

I have just published an edit addressing all of your concerns. I apologize for the short lead, it admittedly is my weak point and I was concerned about being repetitive. Thank you for your guidance. As for the "Early life" section, I have looked everywhere—books, journals, German sources, etc. I even double-checked whilst making this last edit to make sure I didn't miss anything, but all other sources don't mention anything beyond Mandl's date of birth, birthplace, and the fact her father was a shoemaker. The only source that offers any in-depth look into her adolescence is Susan Eischeid's work. The content was obtained through interviews with survivors, so I am confident in its reliability. I completely understand your concern, though, and I do wish I had another source to add. — Staniulis ✿ 05:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I also want to add that the inclusion of "global issues" as part of the Aufseherin training program was a mistake on my part. It was a misreading of the source, which I have just referred back to. I apologize for the confusion and thank you for pointing it out. — Staniulis ✿ 05:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Ref review:

1. 5: Checks out
2. 6: Checks out
3. 24: Checks out
4. 30: Checks out
5. 39: Checks out

With that out of the way, it would be my pleasure to pass the review. Again, the article is really good, and you should be proud about this being your first attempt. I look forward to following your work in the future. Best regards, Grumpylawnchair (talk) 20:21, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.