Talk:Friedrichshafen D.I/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 22:03, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Harrias (talk · contribs) 22:03, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at this shortly. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 22:03, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Three sources are listed in the 'Bibliography', but "Borzutzki, Siegfried (1993)" doesn't appear to be used.
Otherwise, the sources are presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
The sources appear to be from high-quality, reliable sources.
Unable to carry out spotchecks due to offline sources, but nominator is a trusted, well-established editor.
A quick Google books search reveals little This source suggests only one plane was built, while this one doesn't add anything more than what is already in the article.

Images

Only one image is used, in the infobox. The image has a suitable license and caption.
Consider adding alt text, but this is not a GA requirement.

Prose

"The Flugzeugbau Friedrichshafen, after having.." For clarity, perhaps expand this to: "The Flugzeugbau Friedrichshafen aircraft manufacturing company, after having.."
"..to the German Army's (Deutsches Heer Inspectorate of Flying Troops (Inspektion der Fliegertruppen) (Idflieg))." I got a bit confused with the brackets here. It feels like it should be "..to the German Army's (Deutsches Heer) Inspectorate of Flying Troops (Inspektion der Fliegertruppen) (Idflieg)."
"..while the second one had ones that.." The repeated "one"/"ones" here is a little clunky. I think the first could be removed.

Otherwise there isn't much to say about this short, neat article. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 15:20, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. See if my changes are satisfactory.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:10, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, the changes look good. Confirming the article is neutral and stable, and so meets all the GA criteria. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 22:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.