Talk:Frank Bunker Gilbreth

Untitled

Should Gi-lbreth be pronounced as Gee or as Ghi?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.105.60.204 (talk) 13:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

GILL-BREATH. "Gill" as in a fish's gill, "breath" as in a breath of air (noun, not verb "breathe"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.92.55 (talk) 01:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

more efficient weapons/armies save lives??

I'm unable to grasp the logic of the following 2 juxtaposed sentences in this entry for Frank Bunker Gilbreth:

Gilbreth also devised the standard techniques used by armies around the world to teach recruits how to rapidly disassemble and reassemble their weapons even when blindfolded or in total darkness. These innovations have arguably helped save millions of lives.

Interesting argument. How do you reach the conclusion that having soldiers be able to more effectively assemble rifles or other weapons will save lives. These aren't doctors. Is the author only counting the lives of military personnel and not the civilians killed by these reassembled weapons?

This assertion lacks common sense as well as documentation. Mbdowns13 (talk) 16:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)mbdowns13

• I concur with the question and believe this passage needs to be reduced in impact. Although it is vaguely stated in most Gilbreth biographical materials, he was only active at this task for about one month between his commission at the end of 1917 and his protracted illness of Feburary-April 1918. In this time he accomplished little more than some raw training films. Whatever impact they have had over time was certainly limited and cannot be said to have had much impact on the US Army, much less any others. The overstatement of this influence may also come from other work done by the Gilbreths in ordnance factories earier in the war, before US involvement. [Gilbreth historian/biographer] NitroPress (talk) 20:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 6 March 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the page as proposed, without prejudice to a future move to Frank B. Gilbreth. (non-admin closure) Sangdeboeuf (talk) 08:19, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

---

Frank Bunker Gilbreth Sr. → Frank Bunker Gilbreth – Move the article back to its original title to follow WP:COMMONNAME. Frank Gilbreth never used Sr in his lifetime nor do books and articles about him use Sr. His son Frank Jr was only 13 years old when Gilbreth died. See his bio at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. StarryGrandma (talk) 22:22, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

• Support. While the situation is complicated somewhat by the fact that the subject's son, Frank Bunker Gilbreth Jr., was also notable in his own right, all the sources in this article refer to the father without the "Sr", and a google search turns up close to 20k hits for the name without either the "Sr" or "Jr" and a mere 90 or so for the name with "Sr" - and most of the latter look unreliable. Gatoclass (talk) 05:04, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nomination and Gatoclass. Although the full name of subject's son was indeed Frank Bunker Gilbreth Jr., the father was never referenced as "Sr." Also, since the father used "Frank B. Gilbreth" as his professional and pen name, rather than the full "Frank Bunker Gilbreth" (the son likewise used "B.", rather than "Bunker"), I would support a move of this main title header to Frank B. Gilbreth. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 06:40, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

• Support name change for both entry to the standardized "Frank B. Gilbreth" and "Frank B. Gilbreth Jr." [Gilbreth biographer/historian] NitroPress (talk) 20:46, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
• I agree that Frank B. Gilbreth is an even better article title. StarryGrandma (talk) 01:37, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reversions of 5 July 2020

M-Mustapha: Other than that I may have failed to make the edits while logged in, would you be kind enough to explain why my edits were instantly reverted? [Gilbreth biographer and historian] NitroPress (talk) 21:56, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

I've restored most of your changes, except for bits that weren't supported by the references for those sections. The problem was probably the unreferenced additions. Earlier it was common to write articles from what an editor knew with very few references. This proved unworkable and now sources are required. I realize it feels strange to have to provide sources when adding or changing material in unsourced sections. StarryGrandma (talk) 14:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. As possibly the current authority on the Gilbreth family, I will be making further edits and will take care to make sure the references support the additions. I am perpetually frustrated, though, when even careful edits are reverted wholesale almost instantly; I have largely given up trying to contribute to WP on several areas of expertise because of this heavy-handed and often unconsidered responses. NitroPress (talk) 21:51, 8 July 2021 (UTC)