Talk:Friedrichshafen FF.1/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Amitchell125 (talk · contribs) 06:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

(Criteria marked are unassessed)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
 * b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a. (reference section):
 * b. (citations to reliable sources):
 * c. (OR):
 * d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a. (major aspects):
 * b. (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a. (major aspects):
 * b. (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * Pass/fail:

Happy to review this article.

Lead section / infobox

 * Link world record for endurance (Flight endurance record, here and in the text of the article). Presumably this article can be updated with information about the Friedrichshafen FF.1?
 * I looked at the relevant page and several French aircraft had already exceeded that time before that date. So it must be a German record and have amended the article accordingly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:04, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The lead section contains information not included in the main article (e.g. about the company).

Development and description

 * Link floatplane; fuselage.
 * later extended – do we have date?
 * Sadly no. Documentation for a lot, if not most, prewar German aircraft is very spotty. Possibly a result of the war or the forced dissolution of German aircraft companies by the victorious Allies.

History

 * Robert Gsell has his own article in the German Wikipedia, so amend Robert Gsell to Robert Gsell.
 * in Lake Constance - ‘on Lake Constance’?
 * without needing repairs to the airframe or floats - consider improving the prose slightly by making this into a separate sentence.
 * This book (on page 155) appears to mention another record, achieved in September 1912. Is this information reliable? If so, it should be added.
 * Eckhardt has confused the FF.1 and its descendant, the FF.9. The latter aircraft was significantly larger than its predecessor and carried 240 kg of fuel, six times the capacity of the FF.1. Bleiber also confirms that it was the FF.9 that set the 3-passenger record.
 * Jurgen Bleibler's article in Klassiker der Luftfahrt 2012-08, "100 Jahre Wasserflug am Bodensee" pp. 56-59 has a little more information, as well as few other images. It can be downloaded from here.
 * I've been surprised how scanty the coverage of prewar German aircraft has been. How did you find this, because I struck out when I searched for more info on the FF.1?
 * It was listed here. AM
 * I generally avoid airwar.ru like the plague, but I'll admit that I never thought of using them as a bibliographic reference! Should come in handy for some of the other prewar German aircraft articles that I have planned.

On hold
Not much needs to be improved here. I'm putting the article on hold for a week until 6 April to allow time for the issues raised to be addressed. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 15:54, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking this one over; see if my changes are satisfactory.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Passing
Passing the article now, thanks for you prompt responses! Amitchell125 (talk) 21:20, 29 March 2023 (UTC)