Talk:Fokker G.I

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fokker G.I 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

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

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / South Pacific / Balkan / Dutch / European / World War II Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force
	Balkan military history task force (c. 500–present)
	Dutch military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War II task force

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

The Royal Dutch Air Force references are incorrect We should remove all references to KLu and Royal Netherlands Air Force in this article, since the Koninklijke Luchtmacht (KLu) did not come into existence until after WWII. Before WWII the air component of the Dutch armed forces was a part of the army under the name "Luchtvaartafdeeling" (contemporary spelling, i.e. with 2 e's). A similar distinction needs to be made for e.g. the USAF, which also came into existence after WWII. During WWII it was part of the US army and known under the name USAAF, US Army Air Force. --Recoloniser 02:54, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Armament If I remember correctly the B versions had 2 20mm oerlikons in place of the 8 machine guns, with is even heavier than the allready fairly heavy armament of the original model. Remko2 (talk) 17:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

Numerous instances of details in the article are at odds with published sources. A rewrite is beginning to correct the errors. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Awesome, of the 50+ air articles I've looked at this weekend this was one of the sader ones.

Be Bold In Edits (talk) 05:14, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have now read three sources that virtually dispute everything that the original article states. I will cite each new change. Please feel free to find alternate sources of information. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 03:58, 7 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Did your other sources more or less agree with each other or is it all kind of up in the air now?

Be Bold In Edits (talk) 04:33, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources in my books and articles completely line up while the "stuff" in the Wiki article is rife with errors in every passage. Besides which, nothing was ever cited, although seemingly authoritative statements are made. For example, the passages regarding the "five day war" are utterly specious. There were a total of 26 Dutch G.1s in operational service, not 23 as noted, while a further 12 G.1b production export aircraft were conscripted during the attack. The total victories were eight not 13, with only one G.1 downed in aerial combat. Only a few G.1s that were taken over by the Luftwaffe were captured examples while 12 additional production aircraft were completed to be used as trainers. I could go on, but instead I am trying to correct the article, bit by bit. FWiW (excuse the frustration!) Bzuk (talk) 04:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

I wasn't doubting what you were saying if it sounded like that, I was just curious if your other references matched up or if you had to try and figure out which one of the other references is right which is always super frustrating. Like in one article last night I found 5 different cruising speeds for a plane in a bunch of references that other wise agreed on pretty much everything else...

Please note, my testiness is directed at the original editing in the article and I was just expressing incredulity that the article has remained in place for so long with such obvious errors. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 12:16, 7 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

There's nothing unusual about finding different cruise speeds listed for an aircraft. (I'm a pilot, by the way.) It depends on the power setting used, and there's no such thing as a specific "cruise speed." There's long-range cruise, max-power cruise, normal cruise, 65-percent-power cruise, etc. etc. It's like asking a driver what the cruise speed of his car is--could be 55, 65, 70 mph, even 120 mph if he or she routinely drives the Autobahn.173.62.15.212 (talk) 19:20, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]