Talk:Naglo D.II

Military history: Aviation / European / German / World War I 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 not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	European military history task force
	German military history task force
	World War I task force

Aviation: Aircraft Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

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

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Accuracy

Grays German Aircraft of the First World War has a slightly different story:

name Grädig
still working for Albatroswerke and was sacked as a result
type test 24 May 1918
rejected at Aldershof at the request of a man called Schubert from Albatroswerke
no mention of results or whether requested to be re-submitted

Gray's book is a bit long in the tooth but are the differences REALLY down to new information or just differing interpretations of the same material?--Petebutt (talk) 01:48, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On point 3, that is what the article says.TSRL (talk) 13:41, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quadruplane or biplane?

The latest edit, claims the Naglo was a biplane not a quadruplane, based on the quoted Jack Herris. I don't own that but both Green & Swansborough (cited) and Gray & Thetford (German aircraft of the 1st world war) have it, as the article originally said, as a quadruplane and show photos. It sounds like a case of mistaken i/d but by whom?TSRL (talk) 16:51, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to [1] Herris shows it as a quadruplane, so I've reverted it.TSRL (talk) 17:08, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This revert is a mistake, because Herris says that the D.I is a quadruplane and the D.II is a biplane; he bases these observations on info by the late Peter Grosz.Convariety (talk) 01:27, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops, you are right. Sorry. So we have a name dispute in published material, 2 articles saying the quadruplane was the D.II and 1 the D.I. What does Herries call the 1918 trials aircraft? Seems to me the best way forward might be for me to move the original piece to Naglo Quadruplane - this is what Green & Swansborough call it. Then you could start a new page, perhaps calling it the Naglo Biplane to avoid possible name clashes with a preserved copy. I'll add a few comments on the name confusion in the Quad page. What do you think?TSRL (talk) 17:03, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]