This redirect 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
This redirect is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
A fact from Prisoner functionary appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 May 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
I suggest merging this article to Kapo (concentration camp) since, as the article lead here (and there[1]) states, the Nazis commonly referred to the Funktionshäftling as a "kapo", and this is the term most widely used. "Kapo" receives 2,810,000 Google hits[2], while "Prisoner functionary" receives 224,000 Google hits[3]. Yoninah (talk) 21:37, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Having given this some thought and in light of your remarks about this article at the DYK nomination page, I have come to the conclusion that I am opposed to the merge. As I wrote there, I significantly expanded the prisoner functionary article and added to the kapo article, which had some inaccuracies. I expanded the prisoner functionary article because I kept coming across the term in other articles I was working on. What was then in the "prisoner functionary" article was so insignifcant as to be confusing and even misleading, in that it gave no indication of the huge role they actually played in the concentration camp system. Suspecting there was much more to be known, I found, as expected, a very much longer article on the German Wikipedia. I then brought that information over here, adding to it.
Kapo (concentration camp) was started on December 4, 2005 by Vikingstad and Prisoner functionary was begun on July 21, 2009 by Altenmann. Almost nothing was done on "prisoner functionary" till I began expanding it on May 5. I can tell you I did not do this as an expansion of the kapo article, but rather to understand the term "prisoner functionary".
I think the two articles are fine just as they are, separate, with wikilinks to the other. Some points:
The German Wikipedia also has separate pages for "kapo" and "prisoner functionary". They are both of similar length to the English pages.
There is a Kapo disambiguation page, which makes me think the article deserves its own page.
I've been working on articles related to Nazi concentration camps for several months and in my opinion, the term "prisoner functionary" clearly warrants its own page. I certainly don't think the articles should be merged under the title of "Kapo", even if Google shows more hits for the word.
Marrante, I acknowledge your dedication to this article and your vast knowledge of the subject. I am looking at this purely from the point of view of an outsider and of a Wikipedian. The existence of pages such as Prisoner functionary, Kapo (concentration camp) and the Kapo disambiguation page proves only that someone put them up, not that they "should be there". Moreover, the disambiguation page does not even point to prisoner functionary. Both leads state that the terms Kapo and P.F. are synonymous, and most people are much more familiar with Kapo than P.F. I don't understand your objection to expand the Kapo (concentration camp) article with this broader explanation; it would certainly educate people about all the nuances of the "Kapo" label and make for an excellent article. Yoninah (talk) 09:59, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think "vast knowledge" is a bit hyperbolic, but I can see why you would want to combine the pages. Why not just re-direct the kapo page to "prisoner functionary" and let kapo become a section under the broader term? I think part of my resistance to using the title "kapo" as a header is that it's almost a pejorative because so many of them were really brutal. Yet, many people owed their lives to prisoner functionaries. Marrante (talk) 19:50, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just a comment - the exact phrase "Prisoner functionary" in quotes receives 914 Google hits, while the exact word "kapo" in quotes receives 1,190,000. --CliffC (talk) 22:02, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support merge, this article is redundant to the Kapo article, Kapo is vastly more common, and is also redundantly written. For example, the idea that criminals were preferred by the Nazis is mentioned 3 or 4 times. Abductive (reasoning) 23:41, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant writing is easily removed. As to merge direction, as a practical matter it would be easier to merge Kapo, only 1/4 the size of this article, into this more complete one and just rename the result Kapo. --CliffC (talk) 00:59, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support merge "kapo" is the far more prevalent term used to refer to this and there appears to be no reason to keep them as separate articles. The Prisoner functionary article would remain as a redirect if anyone needs to use it. Alansohn (talk) 16:14, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Prisoner functionary is a general concept; having a select group prisoners supervising other prisoners was not invented by the Nazis, although they may have perfected it, and made the term infamous. Article can probably be expanded with examples from Gulag and camps in other countries. Kapo relates specifically to Nazi camps. Both have potential to grow beyond their present state and warrent stand alone articles. MrCleanOut (talk) 22:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The proposed merge is a terrible idea. There's clearly a difference between the generic concept of a prisoner functionary, and the specific historical case of Kapos. I suspect that this is an attempt at "soft" Holocaust denial, by blurring and obfuscating the historical record specific to the Holocaust. 188.192.109.47 (talk) 16:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support merge. The articles discuss the same subject under different names, it is best to deal with this by redirects rather than duplication of content. Apparently "Kapos" were one type of "Prisoner functionary", the other being a "Blockschreiber".[4] The suggestion by MrCleanOut that "prisoner functionaries" exisited in Gulags isn't borne out by my searches. Fences&Windows21:14, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
