Talk:Berlin Tempelhof Airport

Merge

Links to merge in:

• [1]

Built by slave labor?

When CNN reported the closing of Tempelhof this morning, the reporter said it was built by slave labor. It seems somewhat early in the Nazi era for that to be true -- more likely (at least to me) that this was still the era Hitler/Speer were employing the formerly unemployed for projects. Anyone have any evidence one way or the other? CsikosLo (talk) 10:43, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

POV

There is generally a US-Centric feel in the article, esp. the part about the cold war looks like directly out of cold war propaganda, i.e. the Sentence "The Western Allies had achieved their goals and returned a united city of Berlin to the unified German government." is just as much nonsense as the sentence "The USSR did achieve their goals and returned a united city of Berlin to the unified German government.".

---

Denying the history of Berlin and the events of the Cold War which transpired there between 1945 and 1994 disserves everyone. With the events of the Cold War, the erection of the Berlin Wall, and the several confrontations between the United States and Soviet Union over the status of Berlin, the role of Tempelhof in keeping a western presence in Berlin is indisputable.

The fact is that the United States provided the military force to keep the Soviets out of West Berlin and Tempelhof was a major facility in that effort for almost 50 years. One of the major goals of the West after World War II was to get rid that horrid Berlin Wall torn down and achieve a final political settlement with regards to division of Germany and Berlin.

The events of 1989/1990 and the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and Soviet Union caused that to happen. Today all the people of Berlin and Germany live in freedom partly because of the United States presence at Tempelhof. When the goals of the United States were achieved, they left and returned Tempelhof to the German people.

The information I provided to this article is simply a statement of the historical record of the events between 1945 and 1994. The statement in question "The Western Allies had achieved their goals and returned a united city of Berlin to the unified German government" simply provides the rationale for that presence. It is a significat part of the article.

- bwmoll3. 12/14/06.

The fact is, in the original post-WWII environment it was agreed The Four Allies have equal responsibilities over Berlin, and Berlin is to be jointly administered/occupied until the final peace treaty is signed. Berlin Blockade in 1948 was to aim to cause the USA, Britain and France to withdraw from the western sectors of Berlin. In other words, the Soviets were attempting to renege on the Four Power Agreement. And in the process of unilaterally transferring the sovereignty of the Soviet sector of Berlin to the GDR agreement, it had indeed breached the agreement with the three Western Allies over the status of Berlin. The Western Allies were obliged to keep in Berlin until its status were resolved, which eventually came through the form of the Two plus four treaty in 1990. Thus the argument of the Western Allies actions being POV, IMHO, is invalid. --JNZ 11:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Restating slanted viewpoints rather than historically balanced or neutral ones does not make them less slanted or more solid. An article about an airporit, including Tempelhof, or especially Tempelhof, would be better served by attending to a balanced presentation. I feel also that the Nazi history of Tempelhof is neglected, as is that of its chief architect, Ernst Sagebiel, who worked on other Luftwaffe buildings of note. Also, the caption on the Luftbrücke denkmal is not quite accurate but I cannot figure out how to edit it, Actio 03:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC)actio

Post-War Commercial Use

This section omits the important fact that commercial air transport services from THF resumed when Tempelhof Airways, a US-owned "third level" regional scheduled airline operating commuter aircraft with fewer than 20 seats, resumed year-round scheduled services to a number of regional destinations in West Germany in 1985.

Also, instead of having such elaborate details about the USAF's presence there during the Cold War, it would be far more useful to elaborate on the commercial airline operations at the airport during that period, especially prior to the BA/Pan Am move to Tegel on Sep. 1, 1975. Pimpom123 18:07, 11 January 2008 (GMT)

Have now updated and referenced relevant details. Pimpom123 15:19, 27 February 2008 (GMT)

False Sentence

"Boeing demonstrated its prototype 727 as the first jet transport plane in Tempelhof on 2 December 1964." doesn't make any sense. The 727 was (by far) not the "first jet transport plane" - the 707 and 720 that preceded it were also jets (and were also not the first). There was also the DeHavilland Comet, Douglas DC-8, SUD Caravelle, and others.

So I am now deleting this sentence.

Cold War

Have changed the sentence claiming that Tempelhof was the main West Berlin terminal for ALL Western Allies' military aircraft movements. This is only true as far as the US armed forces are concerned. The British and French had their own military air bases in West Berlin at RAF Gatow and the French military section on the northern side of Tegel, respectively. Pimpom123 15:24, 27 February 2008 (GMT)

Sydney Airport

The airport is simply called Sydney Airport, the article was moved a long time ago from Kingsford Smith International Airport as Sydney Airport was deemed the correct name. The anon user who keeps reverting my edits references Avalon Airport "as this is a different airport from Sydney's Avalon airport ". Avalon Airport is a secondary airport for Melbourne some 900 kilometres away from Sydney. The airport is called Sydney Airport, let's leave it that way. Mvjs (talk) 23:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Requested move August 2008

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to support move. JPG-GR (talk) 03:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Tempelhof International Airport → Berlin-Tempelhof Airport — At the moment the naming of the three Berlin airports is inconsequent: There is Berlin-Tegel Airport (de), Tempelhof International Airport (de), and Berlin-Schönefeld International Airport (de). Acutally, none of them bears the word "International" in its official name, but all of them contain the word "Berlin" (see links to their Wikipedia articles in German). Therefore Tempelhof and Schönefeld should be renamed and moved consistently to Berlin-Tempelhof Airport and Berlin-Schönefeld Airport. — Komischn (talk) 22:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Oppose, Tempelhof Airport should be used instead, as it is the common name in English. 70.55.85.122 (talk) 08:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Britannica calls this Tempelhof Central Airport 70.55.85.122 (talk) 08:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the German equivalent is "Zentralflughafen Berlin-Tempelhof" ("Berlin-Tempelhof Central Airport"), but this name appears historic nowadays since it isn't Berlin's only airport anymore. --Komischn (talk) 13:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose As WP:GERCON says, Wikipedia does not use the German-language system of hyphenating the subdivisions of municipalities, as this meaning is not intelligible in English, e.g. Spandau, not "Berlin-Spandau". So here. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move II

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Moved to Berlin Tempelhof Airport.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 08:47, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

---

Tempelhof International Airport → Berlin Tempelhof Airport (Option A), alternatively → Tempelhof Airport (Option B) — the word International is not part of the name. While the English language does not use the hyphenating system as in <city>-<subdivision>, it does use a system of <city served> <actual location> (usually without hyphen, which would place the two names side-by-side) for airports as in London Heathrow Airport, Glasgow Prestwick Airport or Orlando Sanford International Airport. As the airport was not the airport serving the quarter of Tempelhof but the airport serving Berlin - located at Tempelhof - the name should be Berlin Tempelhof Airport. However, if there's no consensus to move it to Berlin Tempelhof Airport, it should at least be renamed to Tempelhof Airport (removing the International). -- 3247 (talk) 14:21, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support A''', *'''Support B''' or *'''Oppose both''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Oppose the Encyclopedia Britannica uses "Tempelhof International Airport" 76.66.195.159 (talk) 14:58, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

• Actually, it uses "Tempelhof Central Airport" [2], which is outdated. -- 3247 (talk) 15:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

• Support Even a quick google check can show that Berlin Templehof is the preferred version. Certainly the version I always hear. WP:COMMONNAME --Narson ~ Talk • 15:32, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• Some googling:

• Tempelhof International Airport (without Berlin Tempelhof International Airport): 640 [3]
• Berlin Tempelhof International Airport: 417 [4]
• Tempelhof Airport (without Berlin Tempelhof Airport): 46,500 [5]
• Berlin Tempelhof Airport: 40,500 [6]

It's clear that International should not be part of the name. The only question is whether to include Berlin. I think that full-text search is giving the wrong impression because it's common to leave out the city name when it can be derived from context. For example, Google makes London Heathrow Airport less common than Heathrow Airport, too:

• Heathrow Airport (without London Heathrow Airport): 2,070,000 [7]
• London Heathrow Airport: 790,000 [8]

--3247 (talk) 16:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

The one search I think you missed out on there was '"Berlin Tempelhof" Airport'. A lot of the time it seems to get referred to just as Berlin Templehof (in the same way one says Tempelhof Airport without Berlin as Berlin can be gained from context, they say Berlin Tempelhof as Airport can be gained from contact). I get 240,000 results for that. --Narson ~ Talk • 20:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, for the records:

• Tempelhof (without Berlin Tempelhof): 335,000 [9] (note that Tempelhof is also a quarter of Berlin)
• Berlin Tempelhof: 251,000 [10] (note that Tempelhof is also a quarter of Berlin)
• Tempelhof (without Berlin Tempelhof) + airport: 56,300 [11]
• Berlin Tempelhof + airport: 108,000 [12]

-- 3247 (talk) 22:34, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

How odd, I get /much/ higher hits for "Berlin Templehof", for me it gets 1.3 million hits. Anyway, i think we are in agreement that Berlin Tempelhof Airport would be the common name that does not conflict? --Narson ~ Talk • 22:43, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

You're not restricting your search to pages in English, so you're also getting results for web pages in German, where Flughafen Berlin-Tempelhof is the most common usage. -- 3247 (talk) 23:35, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah! Thank explains it then. Thank you. Tricksy Germans having their own language! --Narson ~ Talk • 23:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.