Talk:Gail Halvorsen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleGail Halvorsen has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You KnowIn the newsOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 12, 2016Peer reviewReviewed
July 13, 2016Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 22, 2016Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 6, 2005.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that Berlin Airlift "Candy Bomber" Gail Halvorsen would wiggle the wings of his plane to identify himself to children below?
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on February 18, 2022.
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on September 22, 2018, and September 22, 2021.
Current status: Good article

Author[edit]

He has also written two books about his experiences. 75.132.159.195 (talk) 02:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

I propose the merger and subsequent deletion of the article, Gail Halverson, into this article. - Canglesea (talk) 07:09, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so having heard no objections I will merge the Gail Halverson article into this article tonight. - Canglesea (talk) 01:37, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How many tons?[edit]

This Halvorsen page states 23 tons of candy but the Berlin Blockade page documents only "more than 3 tons". This page: "By the end of the airlift, around 25 plane crews had dropped 23 tons of chocolate, chewing gum, and other candies ... " Blockade page: Soon the major candy companies joined in as well. In the end, over three tons of candy were dropped on Berlin,[38]" Ref 38 is http://www.spiritoffreedom.org/airlift.html, perhaps written by vets.

Can we find any backing for the 23 ton figure? I've written to the National Confectioners Association [of America] to ask them to check their Association history. But I don't have any books or other sources. Will obviously check in here again if I get anything.
Thanks, everyone. --jerry-VA
Jerry-va (talk) 23:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I could take in my 2cts: The Berlin-Blockade was from 24 June 1948 – 12 May 1949. So, it is really good to assume 23 or more tons of candies during the whole blockade. Gail Halvorsen startet a thing which exploded in this time of the Berlin-blockade. He made it good, and we accepted this in our language: Rosinenbomber, Wackelflügel! These terms are fixed in the German language. This action influenced heavily high politics due to the beginning cold war: Russians against the west allied France, Britain, U.S.A.!: It made Berlin to an allied base, a sensor to the sowjets. Germany was slain! Lot of plans twisted around, and no one knows how to handle Germany. Then the American Marshall-plan were upcoming, the western states accepted (even Britain) the western zones of Germany as Germany but the Russian eastern region must say "no" due to Moscow whose party tried to establish a very own "Moscow (Marshall) plan". This didn't work really because the Russians removed the eastern German hightec completely as reparation. Thus, the new DDR starts from the beginning null. This is different to the westerly part of Germany then, because the allied forces stopped the demontage in the late 40ties. Finally, this was an advantage like in Japan: The industries could recover, innovates itsself with new machines, new techniques, new styles. France had also this chance then, and exploded in techniques. Their economy was not so good, since France had its colonial problems which reduced econonmy extremely. Britain had similar problems. And Britain itsself had the extreme problem of very old structures, now very old methods, not better done by German machines... Their empire broke away, step by step, land by land...

What else? America used the German patents like other nations also. But the U.S. people are fast! They tried a lot then! They are very practical! They don't care about secondary damage! But be careful then! China is coming, Japan trys, and we in a global Europe are really very good in new techniques...

At last, but not least: What do I try to explain here? Gail Halvorsen has changed the world in his own way simply to bring out Süsskram. In German: "Kleine Ursache, grosse Wirkung! (a small leak will sink a great ship)" Thank you for listening... sailor 46.115.115.36 (talk) 20:31, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy[edit]

I was reading the info on Gail Halverson and came across some erroneous info in the "legacy" section. It says his grandson is attending the US Air Force Academy medical school - I don't believe there is such a beast. The Air Force Academy does not have a medical branch to my knowledge--153.26.2.60 (talk) 04:02, 14 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

The above user is correct. There is no such medical school- the only military medical school in the USA is the USUHS- Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences. I couldn't find anything about his grandson, so I just deleted the line. —Prime642 (talk) 22:25, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if this merits inclusion. But in 2010 or 2011, his story was part of the annual "Christmas With The Mormon Tabernacle Choir" event.

Tempelhof Air Base closing[edit]

The Article states that the distinguished officer attended a closing ceremony in 1993, but the corresponding article on the Templehof Airfied stats that the Airfield closed in 2008, a full 15 years later. unsure as to the correct date or if it is the same airport. It is unlikely that two airports would have the same name, Richard416282 (talk) 08:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The main usage of the US military at Berlin Templehof seems to have ended in 1993. See Tempelhof Central Airport which is the wiki article about the US "Tempelhof Air Base". The wiki article Berlin Tempelhof Airport indicates that the German civilian use of the airport ended in 2008. Same airport with at least two usages and names.--TGC55 (talk) 10:49, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, Tempelhof Airfield was finally closed in 2008 due to a new airfield building in Berlin-Schoenefeld (BER). This project crashed in nearly any way but Tempelhof stayed closed. It is now wether serviced nor really cultured nor planned for further investions. It's mainly just open for discussions about any kind of future! If you have plans, ideas... I have a feeling that you are welcomed in Berlin (they don't really know what to do with it
:-))... Greetings, sailor 46.115.89.59 (talk) 08:11, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Middle name?[edit]

The article says a "Gail S. Halvorsen Elementary School" existed at Rhein-Main Air Base, named after the subject of the article, so he evidently has a middle name beginning with "S". Anyone? I also ran across a YouTube video wherein the MC announces Col. Halvorsen as "Hal" Halvorsen, so we can add this nickname to the article. — QuicksilverT @ 16:25, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Found it — Seymore — QuicksilverT @ 16:42, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted neutrality tag[edit]

I am currently in the process of cleaning up the page. I have been adding reliable sources and doing extensive copyediting. However, I couldn't find anything in the article that was not neutral. After double-checking everything I deleted the neutrality tag. If anyone has any concerns/questions please contact me. Thanks! Alexislynn(BYU) (talk) 18:44, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Gail Halvorsen/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 23:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Pretty good and a worthy subject. A few fixes required.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    See below
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    All images are appropriately licenced
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:


Comments

Placing review on hold. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hawkeye7, unfortunately Alexis has taken ill. Amgisseman can take a look at this nomination tomorrow though. I understand the prose problems, but I'm not sure what the problem is with the references. I did notice that one of them had a dead link in it; is that the issue? They all use citation templates, do they just need more of the fields filled out? Thanks for taking the time to review this nomination. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 21:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What is holding up the nomination is not the prose, but the lack of citations for the statements in the first paragraphs of Professional career ("Halvorsen would serve as part of Air Force Systems Command for the next four years"), Legacy (" After his official retirement in 1974, Halvorsen continued to serve the local, national, and international community in a variety of ways"), and Humanitarian work sections ("Halvorsen also performed multiple candy drops throughout the United States"). These are marked with "citation needed" tags. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:12, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hawkeye7 On Alexis's behalf, I went in and added citations or new sources to that information in the article. Thanks! Amgisseman(BYU) (talk) 19:11, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gail Halvorsen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:42, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gail Halvorsen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:29, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gail_Halvorsen&oldid=1207522578"