Talk:Nieuport Triplane

Nieuport Triplane has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: October 22, 2023. (Reviewed version).

Military history: Aviation / European / French / World War I

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

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

Aviation: Aircraft

	Aviation portal 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
	This article is supported by the aircraft project.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nieuport Triplane/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 09:44, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one, comments will follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 09:44, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments as follows:

Lead

This reads OK

Background

This reads OK

Nieuport 10 Triplane

Do we have a time frame for construction; presumably it was in 1915 if this is when the staggered wing arrangement was invented?
- It was patented on 10 Jan 1916, so presumably built in 1915, but no date of first flight is available.
The aircraft was tested by the French in 1916,: presumably this testing was done by the French Army Aviation? Also approx timeframe?
- No more specific date is known.

Nieuport 17 Triplane

Trenchard ordered the aircraft transferred to home for more thorough testing which were : suggest swapping out 'home' for 'England'. Also 'were' for 'was'
- Good idea to be more specific, but I'm not sure what you comment about swapping "were" for "was" applies to.
The summary report showed: I would add 'RFC' ahead of 'summary'
Over all is one word.

Nieuport 17bis triplane

The fighter retained the same layout as the earlier single seater.: I assume you mean wing layout. Also specify which single seater
- The Nieuport 10 version was a two seater.
  - Dur. Uppercut self-administered. Zawed (talk) 08:48, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
may have been because the biplane may have been : repeated 'may have been'

Bibliography

The Owers ref lacks sufficient info for place of publication
- The n.p. means no place of publication given
  - It suddenly came to me a few days afterwards what that n.p. meant, but by then you had already responded. A further uppercut self-administered. Zawed (talk) 08:48, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other stuff

No dupe links
Image tags look fine.

That's it for me. Zawed (talk) 10:21, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to review this. See if my changes are satisfactory.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:38, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All the changes look acceptable to me, and I made a couple more tweaks to close this all off. Happy to pass as GA as I believe that the article meets the necessary criteria. Zawed (talk) 08:48, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]