I'm a bit of a novice, so it sounds like this is the same explanation you're giving. What is the article leaving out?
I'm a bit of a novice, so it sounds like this is the same explanation you're giving. What is the article leaving out?
As for why the article mentions decreased lift whereas flaps down increases lift, that's maybe a bit more complicated. Lift vs. Angle Of Attack is a curve that tops out at about 15°.[0] Flaps often go to steeper angles than that, but I'm not sure if lift actually starts to decrease again in that scenario. Certainly adding a curve to the back of the wing (flaps) isn't quite the same as changing the angle of the entire wing.
The amount of lift needed is determined by the load factor. In a turn, or when a glider launches via a winch, the load factor is higher than in level flight.
This means that the stall speed varies with load factor.
On the other side, you can still not be stalled below the straight and level stall speed, if the load factor is low enough. In parabolic flight you can see this, and with a load factor of 0 you cannot stall.
You might be thinking of total lift on a 3D wing, which is something you alluded to re: wing loading. But 3d wings vs 2d airfoils are really different concepts that you seem to be mixing up. Airfoils are advantageous regardless of wing loading (which is an inherently 3d concept) because of better L/D and stall characteristics.