Talk:Berlin

Remove etymology section?

To be in line with the purging of German place names in Slavic countries, there should likewise be no Slavic names for German places, no? Berlin is a German city located in Germany where only German is official. 95.194.209.79 (talk) 12:50, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not need to be "in line" with purging of any names; it's an encyclopedia. WP:COMMONNAME is also relevant here. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Picture about Berlin Wall fails to show Berlin Wall clearly

File:A view of the Brandenburg Gate, with East Berlin in the background - DPLA - d7c9c13a406130d632d39c5b6098625a.jpeg

The Berlin Wall bordered with East and West Berlin in 1983

This image is used with this caption in the article. But in this image the Berlin Wall is not clearly visible. I believe another image should be used. Anselm Schüler (talk) 12:25, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect IPA trasncription

The IPA transcription of the german name is incorrect. It is shown as [bɛʁˈliːn] while correctly it would be [bɛɐ̯ˈliːn]. UndeadLime (talk) 10:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Fixed it. UndeadLime (talk) 13:40, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately this is a transcription that is still often used, such as by the German Wiktionary, who refer back to DUDEN. It is very silly. Anselm Schüler (talk) 18:26, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Angbr is ambiguous as to whether it's fricative or approximant, so Template:Angbr already encompasses [ɐ̯], much the same way as Template:Angbr and Template:Angbr, and Template:Angbr and Template:Angbr, are synonymous. Nardog (talk) 13:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

The approimant form of ⟨ʁ⟩ is /ʁ̞/ and even if it was /ʁ̞/ I'm still not sure wether thats correct. UndeadLime (talk) 14:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

That's not how narrowness works. Read the IPA Handbook. Besides, it makes no sense to change it here but not in the hundreds of other such transcriptions, including Albert Einstein, Luxembourg, Angela Merkel, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Habsburg monarchy, Mercedes-Benz, Strasbourg, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, and North Rhine-Westphalia. Nardog (talk) 15:41, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

It's also used like that because it shows the potential difference between and which some (not all) speakers make. Using Template:Angbr IPA for the one with the underlying short vowel is just wrong, it's not a diphthong. In Standard German, those are often homophonous as (which may or may not yield a merger with ), yet in Low German-influenced German they're and , two very distinct monophthongs (I think the latter is fully merged with , which is open back). For others, they're and , or fluctuating between that and for both. It's really complicated and not at all straightforward as in Danish or English. If the is there, it's there as an approximant, or regionally as a fricative which can be devoiced before fortes (as in Luxembourgish).

I agree that the most common pronunciation is , that's the only one I've ever heard in contemporary German (discounting obvious regional accents, you can hear in Switzerland and in Luxembourg). I must admit that I can't hear the r-reflex very well sometimes, to me it at least sometimes sounds like (which is not a transcription I'd use in an encyclopedia, of course). Sol505000 (talk) 11:29, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Number of rainy days

The number of rainy days in Berlin is not correct. Its 100-110 days. 2A02:8109:9F0B:1500:40E8:FDE6:E50C:2A59 (talk) 20:19, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

What source is this based on? I had a look at the dataset and the number is correct, but it's based on a fairly low threshhold (0.1mm). There are 137 days with > 0.3mm and 64 with > 2.5mm. The German wikipedia gives a lower number, but with no indication of the threshhold used. Best, Cfrhansen (talk) 23:04, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Ok understood. Still rather strange metric. I've never seen anywhere else that the definition for a rainy day is as low as > 0.1 mm. 2A02:8109:9F18:3500:6020:4AC6:FB00:509D (talk) 06:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Enhanced picture

In good faith, Celco85 exchanged a picture for another one that was "enhanced". However, when I compare the two pictures, I can see that yes, the second ("enhanced") picture is less skewed than the first one, but the quality of the first picture is so much better! Here are both pictures:

File:Berlin marathon.jpg File:Berlin marathon b.jpg

The resolution of the original image is higher than that of the edited image. So I will put the original image back in. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 07:15, 8 March 2025 (UTC)