Talk:Akaflieg München Mü13

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Akaflieg München Mü13 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Aviation: Aircraft / Gliding

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the aircraft project.
	This article is supported by the gliding project.

Mu-13 or Mu13

Akaflieg Munchen does not use a hyphen when designating its aircraft. However many people have assumed that there was one and so it is in widespread use. Do we perpetuate the lie!!!???????????Petebutt (talk) 05:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lie? That's a strong word for something as minor as a hyphen in a designation, especially when you haven't bothered to present a source to back up your claim. I doubt the person who created the article would think he was lying, either, when he chose the title. "Inaccurate" is a far better word, and it doesn't carry the intentionality of "lie". Some sources, espcecially British ones, use "B-707" etc., for Boeing products, while Boeing itself does not use the "B-". That doesn't ,make the people who use the "B-" liars. So dial back the rhetoric, please. Often companies themselves are inconsistent in the use of punctuation in their designations, and it sometime comes down to an editorial decision on how to display the designations, by our sources, and by WP too. - BilCat (talk) 06:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it should be Mü 13. So we should use the space character beetween the "Mü" and the number. Here is the oldest document I could found for this: http://www.akaflieg.vo.tum.de/images/stories/ueberuns/festschriften/60JahrFestschrift.pdf. But even here they leave out the space character beetween the "Mü" and the number sometimes. BR --Bergfalke2 (talk) 08:43, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"See also" Section

The Wiki markup language in this section could be simplified by deleting the "aircontent" template and replacing it with bold text Aircraft of comparable role, configuration and era
--LukasMatt (talk) 03:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The aircontent template although a bit outdated is still used in aircraft articles so would need a wider project-wide decision to remove. MilborneOne (talk) 08:42, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Akaflieg München Mü13. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111029060740/http://www.sailplanedirectory.com/ndxtype.htm to http://www.sailplanedirectory.com/ndxtype.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]