Talk:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima/Archive 1

message: On 14:27, 23 February 2006,  removed information on the inspiration of an old NetBSD logo without logging in and without giving an edit summary. Why was this warranted? --Damian Yerrick (☎) 14:37, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NetBSD 

message: Surely there are other examples of homage or parody, other than the cover of Monstrous Regiment? -- ALoan (Talk) 11:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes there are.  Status Quo, the music group, had a song called 'In the Army Now'.  The cover is obviously a homage to it. Douglasnicol 15:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Example of homage or parody?

message: I was going to run this as the featured article on Joe Rosenthal's 95th birhtday (coincidentally a few days before hte movie comes out) but he died yesterday :( Raul654 17:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 94 isn't bad... But don't change your plans, please! --Jumbo 20:18, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Thats a good idea; however, I do not know where to find these cartoons either.  When you find them though, that would be an interesting addition to the article. Wikipediarules2221 02:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dammit

message: Underneath the flame modified sherman picture it is described as a "ronson sherman". I believe that the nickname "Ronson" was bestowed by German troops to the Sherman because of how easily it lit on fire when shot by a shell(ronson was a brand of lighter),not the flame modification.
:I think this is a coincidence: the tanks were certainly know as "Ronsons" for their tendancy to light on the first strike; however, the flame-throwing equipment that was added to these tanks was known as the Ronson system.    See the caption to the image here - A Marine flame tank, also known as a "Ronson," scorches a Japanese strongpoint. The eight M4A3 Shermans equipped with the Navy Mark 1 flame-thrower proved to be the most valuable weapons systems on Iwo Jima. Department of Defense Photo (USMC) 14075. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh silly me! I didn't click the article for the "Ronson system". Gothca. --Ashmole 20:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ronson" sherman 

message: Should there be a mention of who was in the first group of flag raisers? -HiFiGuy 19:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the references for Hank Hansen has a list and a photo -  - First Lieutenant Harold G. Schrier, Platoon Sergeant Ernest I. Thomas Jr., Sergeant Henry O. Hansen, Corporal Charles W. Lindberg, Private First Class Louis C. Charlo and Private First Class James Michels.  The (less famous) photograph was taken by Sergeant Louis R. Lowery. -- ALoan (Talk) 09:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With that being said, shouldn't there also be an article about the original flag raising? It's an extremely significant moment because without the first raising, there never would have been a second. There is one man on the planet who I think would agree. His name is Charles W. Lindberg, the last surviving member of either event. I may just create that article myself. J-Dog 00:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you going to call it?  Raising the First Flag on Iwo Jima? Hbdragon88 03:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good question. Kinda does present a problem doesn't it? I don't know what to call it. But there deffinately should be an article about the event. To the men that fought there, the first raising was a helluva lot more meaningful. I think your name idea sounds pretty good actually. Thtat's what Charles W. Lindberg calls it. J-Dog 11:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

text: The raising of the first flag surely deserves mention.  Bradley's book, and Eastwood/Spielberg's movie adaptation of the book, both do a wonderful job of emphasizing the emotional and important raising of that first flag.  Part of the complete story of the famous raising is the odd circumstance that brought about its fame.  It would do well as a stand-alone section here, in the 'Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima' wiki, or as its own. - Thaimoss 00:58, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't see why you can't just have a headed paragraph in the article listing the names of the original flag raisers. Currently the article only mentions two by name, in different sections, and sort of in passing only. If nothing else it provides context and cohesivness to the first flag raising, and clarifies who was/wasn't involved (which I lost track of in the Eastwood film). There can't be too much more to be said that's not already in the article so a new one probably isn't necessary (but if you want too ...) The Yeti 17:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whither the first flag? 

message: I added the sentence "A Confederate flag was raised upon Suribachi after its fall, but was quickly replaced with the Stars and Stripes." I learned this in the very well researched book Coski, John M. (2005) The Confederate Battle Flag: America's Most Embattled Emble. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. . It surprised me, but Coski has many excellent sources for this event and for the popularity of confederate flags among the troops in general.  I thought it was worth mentioning here. I'd quote the page number but I just returned the book to the library.  I hope the sentence doesn't annoy anyone. Pfly 19:58, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do want a page number, because this is the first time I've heard *any* source indicating this and I have a great deal of trouble believing it. Raul654 20:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I'll look it up next time I'm at the library. You can delete it if you'd like until I can come up with a better citation/info.  And even then, it may be trivial; then again, it seems weird and interesting to me. I'll get back on it.. Pfly 21:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

text: If I recall correctly, the soldiers who flew the confederate flag at Iwo Jima were not doing it as some kind of symbolic act so much as a way to have fun with an unofficial symbol that was popular among some units.  The higher ranking officers were not pleased.  But again, I'll have to recheck for the details and I'll check Coski's sources too.  I'm not a supporter of the confederate flag so much as just curious about it, after seeing its use in many ways during a trip through the South recently. Pfly 23:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to follow up, I got the book again and discovered I was wrong -- the Confederate flag was raised from the ruins of Shuri Castle upon the fall of Okinawa, not Iwo Jima and Mount Shuribachi.  My mistake; sorry. Pfly 00:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Confederate flag

message: I was at my gilfriend's parents' house this weekend. While there, we took a day trip to the new Marine Corps museum in Virginia, so I got a picture of the flag from the second (more famous) flag raising. The conditions of the flag (absolutely positively no flash photography, and lots of overhead lights on the glass) made it hard to get a good picture, but it's passable. I think this is a BIG addition to this article. Raul654 01:53, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a great addition, thanks.  I hope you don't mind me doing a few edits to crop the photo and take some of the reflections off the glass.  If not, feel free to revert to your image. SteveHopson 03:10, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture now available

message: :One such example is from Hardcore punk band The Dead Kennedys artwork for the back cover of their album Give Me Convenience or Give Me Death. The picture depicts a mock version of the original photo, with the American flag replaced by a Coca-Cola flag. The re-interpretation of this famous image signifes the band's ideology and belief in the evils of the corporatizing of America and the world.
I found an image of the Dead Kennedys cover  and it appears to have very little connection to the Iwo Jima photo.  Sure, it shows a flag raising, but a completely different one.  I have removed the above paragraph accordingly. --HappyDog 12:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Dead Kennedys reference. 

message: The link to the image of sovjets putting the flag on the reichstag (at the see also part) is broken, could someone upload it? I do not have the permission to do so. Image is in public domain and available at http://www.famouspictures.org/mag/index.php?title=Image:Reichstag_flag.jpg Cheers!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiAtze (talk • contribs) 22:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image Link broken 

message: The first settlers, outside of whaler crews, were the Hawaiians who live there to this day. -- 01:38, 16 July 2007 (66.215.44.189
*What are you talking about?  Haha Jima, to the north of Iwo Jima was colonized by a mixed group of folk (English, portuguese, Italians, and Hawaiians) in 1827 after the island group was visited by American and English whalers.  Commodore Perry topped at Chichi Jima in 1853 on the way to Japan to force open their country to trade.  In 1861 Japan made claim to the Volcano Island chain (of which Iwo Jima is a part) and dispatched colonists there in 1887.  No other government challenged Japan's claim to the islands.  Foreign settlement was banned from the island chain in the early 1900 - those living on Haha Jima, including the Hawaiians were forced to leave.  The Japanese colonists on Iwo stayed until a few months before the battle when the Japanese military packed them up and sent them to the Japanese mainland.  The US military controlled the island until the late 1960s when they returned it to the Japanese.  The Japanese have since controlled the island, but have banned anyone from living on the island.  This is a very touchy subject with the Japanese that were forced to leave during the way.  They wish to return and have been fighting their governemnt for years regarding this issue. A small victory was won by this group of want-to-be returnees when they won a fight in June 2007 to rename the island Iwo Jima (or Io if using correct Japanese Roman alphabet spelling) to Io To (basically the same translation in English - Sulfur Island).  Hawaiians living on Iwo Jima?  Nope.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.91.83.230 (talk) 05:06, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: first settlers

message: This name, appearing several times in the article, is spelled [last name] as DeWeldon De Weldon deWeldon, and de Weldon. What is the correct term, and it should be made consistent. --Dumarest 12:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Wikipedia article Felix de Weldon says Felix de Weldon and notes no spelling variants or issues. So I'm fixing everything to that form. — Adhemar 13:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Felix de Weldon

message: Someone keeps putting in the urban legend, which is present on the Web, that the 1945 stamp showing the photo was the best selling stamp in US Post Office History, at least for many years.  This just isn't true.  It was outsold by three other stamps from 1945 (http://www.1847usa.com/identify/YearSets/1945.htm)  And it is not even a hair on the record holder for a commemorative, which has held the record for over sixty years, 3 cent Win the War stamp of 1942, with over 20 billion sold (http://www.1847usa.com/identify/YearSets/1942.htm).  The Iwo Jima stamp's 137 million was good, but not exceptional.  As for the claim that living people could not be depicted on US stamps, that was not quite true.  The policy was against honoring individual living people--though there were exceptions to this, Lindbergh had his name on a 1927 stamp (but no photo).  A number of living people were depicted on the Navy commemorative the same year--which outsold the Iwo Jima stamp, by the way.--Wehwalt 15:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked at this source again, and Wehwalt is correct. Somehow I missed the issance numbers the first time I looked at that source. Raul654 15:55, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I am troubled by putting in that it sold 137 million copies, without context that it was the fourth best of the year.  Frankly, though I don't have a source for this, the sales were determined more or less by print run minus spoilage minus a small number of returns when the stamps went off sale, so all the stamps that sold around 130 million were basicly the same in popularity.  Postmasters didn't want to deal with returns of accountable paper, so they would push sales of stamps near (and, frankly, even after) the off-sale date.--Wehwalt 16:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Stamps

message: This is getting ridiculous. The rule is that 'an' precedes a word starting with a vowel sound, and 'a' precedes one starting with a consonant sound. "Historic", depending on whether or not you aspirate the 'h', can start with either -- so it's correct either way. So stop changing it already. Raul654 17:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just about to revert the change (back to ‟a historic”), because ‟an historic” sounds so wrong to me. Now I learned both are right, I’ll refrain myself. — Adhemar 18:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's going to get a negative/positive either way we go. Jmlk17 04:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For those curious, the "rule" applies to all words beginning with a pronounced "H."  If the accented syllable is the first syllable (e.g. HANDsome, HIStory), it's preceded by "a."  If it's after the first syllable (e.g. hysTERical, hisTORical), it's preceded by "an."  I think this rule is considered archaic now, so it really doesn't matter.  Just letting you know where it comes from.RC Cola (talk) 19:44, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: An versus A

message: Hiya, I am reading a biography of Leslie Fiedler, one of the most noteworthy commentators on American culture in the 20th century, who was in fact present at the raising of the flag on Iwo Jima. Dunno if you can use this quote, I like it a lot:
:Because the wind was wrong the first time, the entire ritual had to be photographed a second time. He [Fiedler] saw "the photographer (no doubt dreaming of a Pulitzer Prize) gesticulating frantically as he urged his weary amateur cast to act once more - and this time get it right - themselves in their historical roles". ("Remembering", 3) (...) "To be authentically American," Leslie writes, "an icon had to be at least partially fake."
This is from Mark Royden Winchell: "Too Good to Be True". The Life And Work Of Leslie Fiedler. University of Missouri Press: Columbia  2002, pp. 40-41. The Reference is to "Remembering Iwo Jima: A Trip Though Time", said in the appendix to be a "Typescript in the author's possession". --Janneman 19:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Erm, no. It's flatly wrong, and totally contradicted by (literally) every other piece of evidence in the record. Raul654 19:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: maybe, but pithy & true all the same. --Janneman 20:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Maybe not totally wrong.  As Fiedler is talking about the first flag raising which was posed and had to be stopped in mid, "raising" while Lowery changed his film.  Which could have been mistaken for taking it a second time because of the wind. -- RabitsVinge 06:46, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fiedler 

message: I have deleted the note that claims James Bradley was the one responsible for naming the group picture of Marines beneath the flag the "Gung-Ho" shot.  Rosenthal always called it this.  It is called this in the 1995 book "Shadow of Suribachi:  Raising The Flags on Iwo Jima" (a copy of which I have before me) by Parker Bishop Albee, Jr. and Keller Cushing Freeman, so it definitely was not nicknamed by James Bradley in his 2000 book "Flags of Our Fathers."  Sir Rhosis 20:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Who named the "Gung-Ho" Picture

message: Why was the cropped version of the picture removed? (If memory served it used to be here.) While the one currently on the page is, indeed, the photo Mr. Rosenthal took, the cropped image is the one that ignited the imagination of the country. Some (well, maybe just me) have argued that without the cropping, the photo simply does not have the same impact. Let's give credit to the editor who knew what to throw away and what to keep. Jinian 21:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cropped version 

message: I see people are at it again, 
despite previous discussion on the matter. I will say it again - please do not change the first sentence. It's correct either way. Raul654 23:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A versus An, round two

message: I mentioned that this isn't really 'memorable' a week ago but nobody has done anything about it since...? Should I flag up a country bias or something? Duh, I don't even know how to do that, but... americans, tut.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeygirl (talk • contribs) 21:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: memorable

message: But I was thinking, shouldn't it have some mention of the film, by Eastwood? --83.141.77.130 (talk) 18:02, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It already does: As a catharsis, James Bradley spent four years interviewing the families of all the flag raisers, and published Flags of Our Fathers, a definitive book on the flag raising and its participants.[43] This book inspired a 2006 movie of the same name, directed by Clint Eastwood.  Raul654 (talk) 18:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But it doesn't tell you if the films any good. The film by Eastwood, I mean. --83.141.77.130 (talk) 11:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brilliant Article 

message: Considering the second flag was raised after a request that the first flag be retained as a souvenir, I was wondering if anyone knew what became of the two flags raised on Mt. Suribachi and might add that information to the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DirkLangeveld (talk • contribs) 03:05, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If you had read this article, you would know the answer. Raul654 (talk) 19:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened to the flags? 

message: In the article you write that the both falgs are located in the National Museum of the Marine Corps. but the museum itself () talks about having only the second flag, not the first one. Do you have any better source for that pecae of information? 89.138.149.248 (talk) 10:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As I found out during my visit there, they have 3 flags, actually - the flag raised during the first flag raising, the second flag raising, and the third flag. (Although not mentioned in this article, the third flag replaced the second after the second was damaged by wind.). The flags are rotated in-and-out of the same display case so that no one of them gets too worn from display. Raul654 (talk) 18:34, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed 

message: PFC James "Chick" Robeson was involved (or not involved, as the case may be) in the first flag raising, not the second.  The Japanese officer attacking from the cave occured during the first.  By the time the second was raised, things had calmed down on the top of the mountain.  Robeson is interviewed fairly extensively about his role in the first flagraising in "Shadows of Suribachi: Raising The Flags on Iwo Jima" by Parker Bishop Albee, Jr. and Keller Cushing Freeman, 1995, Praeger Publishers, . Sir Rhosis 22:24, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From what I read, it was the fist raising that used the pipe for an improvised flagpole, the second and more famous raising used a pole especially designed for that purpose. ---kchishol1970 04:07, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect. Raul654 04:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I haven't seen any sources besides the coast guards discredited source that mentioned marines hauling a huge pole up from the bottom of the volcano.  In Bradley's book they say:
-- RabitsVinge 07:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Robeson - First or Second Flag Raising?