Talk:1999 CDU contributions scandal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| WikiProject Germany | (Rated Start-Class, Low-importance) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
This is more or less a direct translation of the German version, with some added information from my Google search results. My German isn't great, though, and some of the article talks about aspects of the German political system I'm not familiar with, so I would appreciate input. Jxg 20:28, 2004 May 22 (UTC)
[edit] Notes moved from Wikipedia:Translation into English
- Article: de:CDU-Spendenaffäre
- Corresponding English-language article: None that I can find
- Unless we discover that the English-language newspapers at the time had a name for this, let's put it at CDU contribution scandal. -- Jmabel 04:55, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
- Worth doing because: Looks very complete, and the English Wiki doesn't have one
- Originally Requested by: Αλεξ Σ 03:56, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Status: I translated it at 1999 CDU Funding Scandal. Any assistance would be appreciated. Jxg 20:34, 2004 May 22 (UTC)
- Looks good enough to be moved to "done" IMO.Cat 16:17, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Other notes:
I would like to see the German version translated into English. As far as the citations being in German, you do what we do in Canada: if it is only in French, we refer to it as is. Citations are basically proof of source of statement/information. Example: the article from La Presse contradicts Süddeutsche Zeitung in it's portrayal of such and such.
Also using the odd german phrase/term in the english version isn't going to kill us english speakers - though putting a translation in brackets would be nice. The bigger words are easier to look up than the ones to do with syntax. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.77.37.48 (talk) 03:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

