Talk:Helmut Lent/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   still needs a copy edit to fix numerous misspellings

   I think the issues have been addressed. MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Lent's unit didn't convert to the Bf 108, which was an unarmed liaison aircraft, it received some and he learned how to fly them. I didn't think that the Ju 88 G-6 could carry four. How certain is it that the aircraft was carrying four or was he flying something else? More comments later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

It did convert for training purposes to the Bf 108 as an interim solution prior to training on the Bf 109 and Bf 110. Yes, the Ju 88 had a crew of four (see Ju 88 article) and multiple sources state the same story about the circumstances causing his death. MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Scroll down to the Ju 88G specification and you'll see that it was a three-seat aircraft; but this is a minor point. I still have problems with the Bf 108 conversion. III./JG 132 aka II./JG 141 was already equipped with early models of the Bf 109 by the time this is mentioned and I have a hard time believing that they were turned in for 108s, as I'm fairly certain that they didn't fully equip with 110s until mid-39 and kept 109s until then.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

If you want I can scan and post the pages that clearly state this as factual (see Hinchliffe). How should I handle this? What do you suggest? My sources say that they trained on the Bf 108 as an interim solution to the Bf 109 and Bf 110. MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I still think that Hinchcliffe misunderstood the situation, but since my sources are in storage I'm going to pass it because I can't prove differently using only my faded memories.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)