Talk:Berlin

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)

File:A_view_of_the_Brandenburg_Gate,_with_East_Berlin_in_the_background_-_DPLA_-_d7c9c13a406130d632d39c5b6098625a.jpeg 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)

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)

:{{angbr|ʁ}} is ambiguous as to whether it's fricative or approximant, so {{angbr|ʁ}} already encompasses [ɐ̯], much the same way as {{angbr|j}} and {{angbr|i̯}}, and {{angbr|ɹ}} and {{angbr|ɚ̯}}, 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 [https://books.google.com/books?id=33BSkFV_8PEC&pg=PA28 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 {{IPA|[aʁ]}} and {{IPA|[aːɐ̯]}} which some (not all) speakers make. Using {{angbr IPA|aɐ̯}} for the one with the underlying short vowel is just wrong, it's not a diphthong. In Standard German, those are often homophonous as {{IPA|[aː ~ ɑː]}} (which may or may not yield a merger with {{IPA|/aː/}}), yet in Low German-influenced German they're {{IPA|[æː]}} and {{IPA|[ɑː]}}, two very distinct monophthongs (I think the latter is fully merged with {{IPA|/aː/}}, which is open back). For others, they're {{IPA|[aʁ]}} and {{IPA|[aː ~ ɑː]}}, or fluctuating between that and {{IPA|[aː ~ ɑː]}} for both. It's really complicated and not at all straightforward as in Danish or English. If the {{IPA|/r/}} 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 {{IPA|[bɛɐ̯ˈliːn]}}, that's the only one I've ever heard in contemporary German (discounting obvious regional accents, you can hear {{IPA|[bɛɾˈliːn]}} in Switzerland and {{IPA|[bæʁˈliːn]}} in Luxembourg). I must admit that I can't hear the r-reflex very well sometimes, to me it at least sometimes sounds like {{IPA|[bɛˈliːn]}} (which is not a transcription I'd use in an encyclopedia, of course). Sol505000 (talk) 11:29, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

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)

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:

Image:Berlin marathon.jpg Image: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)