Talk:Joachim Helbig

message: looking better.  Needs a translation of Sturzkampfgeschwader in parens.  Auntieruth55 (talk) 17:36, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sturzkampfgeschwader trans 

message: *Joachim Helbig was born on 10 September 1915 on the estate called Börln, which is located in Dahlen, Saxony.  On the Boerli estate in Dahlen, Saxony.  the next sentence should be a note....it disrupts the flow of the paragraph and isn't relevant to the article per se.
*...Helbig was taught to fly by his two friends, Fritz Sohler and Gerhard Schröder, and was able to earn his his Luftwaffe Advanced Pilot's Certificate (Erweiterter Luftwaffen-Flugzeugführerschein), also known as 'C'-Certificate, confirming proficiency on multi-engine aircraft. Helbig's experience was unique in the entire Luftwaffe bomber force
:: Two friends, Fritz Sohler and Gerhard Sch., taught Helbig to fly and he earned his Luftwaffe Advanced Pilot's Certificate..., also known as 'C'-Certificate, with proficiency on multi-egine aircraft. This made Helbig's experience unique in the entire Luftwaffe bomber force. (also, last sentence needs clarification....what about this is unique, proficiency in multiple engines, or proficiency first in multiple engines, rather than single engines).
* at the outbreak of World War II, Leutnant Helbig ...
There are also a number of places that you've used weak verbs, when switching things around could make it stronger, and you've got some grammar issues that weren't present before.  ?  Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  upping the ante 

message: The article contains over 25 citations to Franz Kurowski (please see linked article. I tagged the article accordingly. K.e.coffman (talk) 10:15, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreliable sources tag 

message: Moving here for storage as the wording is vague and it's unclear what the point is: 
*Two weeks later, on 21 April 1941, II./LG 1 attacked the shipping in the port of Patras. They claimed to have sunk two freighters totalling .Taghon 2004a, p. 209. The small passenger liner  of , carrying 278 wounded, was sunk on 20 April in Patras and  of  was sunk on 21 April in the same harbour.Shores, Brian Cull 1992, p. 405. It is not clear whether Ioanna was sunk by LG 1. The Regia Aeronautica ground attack pilot Major Giuseppe Cenni, commanding the Junkers 87-equipped 238 Squadriglia is also a candidate for sinking the ship.Smith 2011, p. 218.
*On 2 May, LG1 sank the Norwegian ship , that was flying Red Cross flags and carrying medical personnel. Following their attack on Dronning Maud the German aircraft proceeded to bomb nearby Gratangen, destroying several houses and killing two civilians.Hafsten 1991, p. 43
*In June 1944, LG 1 was ordered to transfer to Belgium for air defense during the Allied invasion of France.Brütting 1974, p. 99. Helbig formed a combined ground support and reconnaissance battle group as part of the Luftwaffe's operations against the Allied bombing campaign on 10  September 1944. Visiting a unit at the Vogelsang Airfield, he was severely wounded by strafing Allied aircraft. Due to his injuries Helbig had to surrender command of his unit.Taghon 2004b, p. 372. 
*In the last weeks of the war in Europe, Helbig commanded a combat unit on the Eastern Front; he surrendered to the American forces on 8 May 1945.Berger 1999, p. 121. After the war he worked in a civilian profession. Helbing died in Malente on 5 October 1985 following a car accident on vacation in Spain.
K.e.coffman (talk) 23:10, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of these are in the because Kurowski explicitly attributed them to Helbig and that's not often the case. Others are because they provide example of the types of combat that Helbig participated in.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:01, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't believe that including material to specifically counteract the (unreliable) Kurowski is needed, now that Kurowski has been removed. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:34, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps, but since Kurowski's the single easiest source on Helbig to access in English, I tend to think that we need to counter his narrative with facts.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:17, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patras and more

message: The article contains a number of sources reliability of which has not been positively established. I've thus restored the tag: dff.  K.e.coffman (talk) 20:38, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Re: Without discussion? See talk page, yes, I reviewed the Talk page and I do not see consensus that the tag should be removed. In addition, per WP:BRD, once an edit has been reverted, editors are expected to discuss on Talk page, not reinstate the edit that has been challenged. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:51, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: No consensus in favour of keeping it. Seems to be the desire of one or two editors. Dapi89 (talk) 15:52, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Re: "Majority say no", please point me to where the tag is discussed. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:42, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You know as well as I do, your contentious claims about were rejected. Re-read the discussions if you need to. Dapi89 (talk) 20:48, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

text: There is no consensus this article contains unreliable sources. End of story. Dapi89 (talk) 13:38, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no consensus that the article contains only reliable sources. For example, the article still contains citations to Ralph Schumann by the right-wing German publisher  (pls see linked article). In any case, the claim was that "the majority said no", which I see no evidence of. Thus the tag should remain, until a consensus is reached that it should be removed. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I would regard publications from VDM Heinz Nickel and from its subsidiary Schild-Verlag (München) as of dubious reliability, sufficiently dubious to justify the tag. I hope this helps. Richard Keatinge (talk) 21:56, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever else VDM Heinz Nickel or Schild-Verlag may have published, no one has been able to impugn Taghon on any other grounds than his publisher, so I reject this blanket condemnation.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:36, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: These publishers - and others - have a well-established reputation for being, or at least supporting, Nazi fandom. This does put them, at best, at the low end of usability. At worst they are not reliable at all. The tag still appears reasonable. Richard Keatinge (talk) 20:24, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps so, but the only actual references to Nazi-sympathetic works were to biographies. And, of those, I've only seen the pages from Schumann covering Helbig, which doesn't evidence much, if any, of that sort of thing. So, I'd suspect that any bias issues are more likely confined to Army or SS biographies, where there's more opportunities for war crimes and the like not to be mentioned. So still painting, IMO, with too broad a brush. Point out something specifically Nazi-biased from Schumann or Taghon or give it over for lack of substantial proof.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:31, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreliable sources tag (2) 

message: The claim was "Majority say no" (about keeping the tag?). Please point me to where the majority has rejected the idea that the tag should be kept (or discussed the tag). K.e.coffman (talk) 20:57, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no consensus this article contains unreliable sources. End of story. Dapi89 (talk) 13:38, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no consensus that the article contains only reliable sources. For example, the article still contains citations to Ralph Schumann by the right-wing German publisher  (pls see linked article). In any case, the claim was that "the majority said no", which I see no evidence of. Thus the tag should remain, until a consensus is reached that it should be removed. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I would regard publications from VDM Heinz Nickel and from its subsidiary Schild-Verlag (München) as of dubious reliability, sufficiently dubious to justify the tag. I hope this helps. Richard Keatinge (talk) 21:56, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever else VDM Heinz Nickel or Schild-Verlag may have published, no one has been able to impugn Taghon on any other grounds than his publisher, so I reject this blanket condemnation.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:36, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: These publishers - and others - have a well-established reputation for being, or at least supporting, Nazi fandom. This does put them, at best, at the low end of usability. At worst they are not reliable at all. The tag still appears reasonable. Richard Keatinge (talk) 20:24, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps so, but the only actual references to Nazi-sympathetic works were to biographies. And, of those, I've only seen the pages from Schumann covering Helbig, which doesn't evidence much, if any, of that sort of thing. So, I'd suspect that any bias issues are more likely confined to Army or SS biographies, where there's more opportunities for war crimes and the like not to be mentioned. So still painting, IMO, with too broad a brush. Point out something specifically Nazi-biased from Schumann or Taghon or give it over for lack of substantial proof.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:31, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Schumann, VDM Heinz Nickel