From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The usage of the name "Junkers" is very confusing on this page. It os often unclear whether it referes to the engineer Hugo Junkers or to one of his former companies, such as Junkers & Co or others. Also, this article does not differntiate between the different companies. The history of the company Junkers & Co needs to transferred to the porper lemma (instead of the page redirecting here) while this page should only deal with the aircrafts. -- Riper2008 14:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I disagree. I think the distinctions between the different companies are well explained through the body of the article. Further, the wiki generally doesn't use "Co" in names, so your move is against general guidelines. I haven't seen anyone else express concerns about this either. Maury 17:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Dear Maury, first of all, sorry for the "& Co" thing. I wasnt aware of this rule and just blindly copied the name from the german wikipedia. However, I didnt move any content there, so no harm done. One could use "Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke AG" as the article name instead. What I moved was the content from "Junkers" to "Junkers (aircraft)" as the name stands for various companies (which may all be traced back to Hugo Junkers but have nothing in common anymore today). That I would like to separate the aircraft history from the rest was only a idea so far that I wanted to put on discussion. Regarding the name distinction: I cannot see any distinction between the person or any company. Only the paragraph "Financial Troubles" and the last paragraph mentions other companies at all. Moreover, only in the same paragraph the owner Hugo Junkers is mentioned for the first time, and this is only with his first name... . Also, I may be the first one to be concerned about it, but maybe I am because as another example, the article only starts with the production of airplanes in 1914. In fact, Junkers & Co was founded in 1895 and had a successful history in non-aviation technology before starting with the design of aircrafts (actually this part of the company still exists today, now under ownership of the Robert Bosch GmbH). I hope you can see my point. Cheers, Riper2008 05:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Junkers.png[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Junkers.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

what about post WWII East German Junkers[edit]

Most of East German Junkers were forcibly relocated by the Soviets to work on the Russian Space program. Perhaps this is worth mentioning? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


I assume Jumo is a contraction of "Junkers Motorenbau"? Drutt (talk) 09:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Junkers Today[edit]

Would it be possible to expand on and mention a bit about Junkers today or clearly state what happened to Junkers after the 1960's. The whole post-war history seems to be absent. Please forgive me if this question or suggestion seems a lot, I have the upmost respect for peole who research and write articles like this - but it was curiousity about what happened to Junkers post-WWII that led me to this article in the first place! ConsulHibernia —Preceding undated comment was added at 11:19, 11 January 2009 (UTC).

The Ju 52 was a bona fide commercial success[edit]

What is a "bona fide commercial success"? Could the person who wrote this please use English that we can all understand? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I think the picture of the only surviving J1 is of the later J1 biplane ground-attack aircraft, not of the experimental monoplane.Manormadman (talk) 14:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Junkers. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:48, 2 April 2016 (UTC)