Talk:American Airlines Flight 327
Appearance
![]() | American Airlines Flight 327 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology 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: December 10, 2024. (Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:American Airlines Flight 327/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: RecycledPixels (talk · contribs) 16:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Pi.1415926535 (talk · contribs) 05:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
I'll take this review. Please respond to comments with {{done}}, {{not done}}, etc. Thanks, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- @RecycledPixels: I've completed my review. Most minor items, and some recommended rearranging. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I hope to have some time tomorrow to go through the list. RecycledPixels (talk) 07:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Still here, planning to go through this, but the timeline has slipped to "soon". Sorry, RL events taking priority at the moment. RecycledPixels (talk) 08:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Responding back here with what I've had a chance to look at in the brief time I've had this last week. This next week at least through next weekend looks the same, although I may have some mornings with a couple of hours of brain time available. We're definitely past the traditional hold time on a GA, so you can fail this for now if you don't want to wait for me, but I'm not ignoring you, and I'd appreciate the extra time if you'd allow it. RecycledPixels (talk) 09:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @RecycledPixels: Take your time - you're clearly working on the GA in good faith, and I fully understand that real life busyness happens. My understanding is that the 7 days is generally a minimum, and that longer articles or external factors may need more time. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Pi.1415926535:. I've made it through the list, thank you for taking a look at the article and your patience with my RL delays. RecycledPixels (talk) 20:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Great work, happy to pass this now! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Pi.1415926535:. I've made it through the list, thank you for taking a look at the article and your patience with my RL delays. RecycledPixels (talk) 20:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @RecycledPixels: Take your time - you're clearly working on the GA in good faith, and I fully understand that real life busyness happens. My understanding is that the 7 days is generally a minimum, and that longer articles or external factors may need more time. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Responding back here with what I've had a chance to look at in the brief time I've had this last week. This next week at least through next weekend looks the same, although I may have some mornings with a couple of hours of brain time available. We're definitely past the traditional hold time on a GA, so you can fail this for now if you don't want to wait for me, but I'm not ignoring you, and I'd appreciate the extra time if you'd allow it. RecycledPixels (talk) 09:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Still here, planning to go through this, but the timeline has slipped to "soon". Sorry, RL events taking priority at the moment. RecycledPixels (talk) 08:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I hope to have some time tomorrow to go through the list. RecycledPixels (talk) 07:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Infobox and lede
[edit]- I recall that TF Green is not actually in Providence - it's in nearby Warwick, Rhode Island. Several of the other airports also seem to be outside their respective municipalities. The article should reflect that. Other than TF Green, the others can probably just say "near" rather than "in".
- T.F. Green is six miles south of downtown Providence, and American Airlines did not sell tickets to Warwick, they sold them to Providence, served by an airport in a suburb to the south. I like the suggestion of "near Providence" and similar to other airports, and have made that change in reference to Providence but have not yet hit the other airport articles to determine which of those articles need to be changed from "in" to "near" the named cities. I'll finish those during this review.
Partially implemented
- I've changed mentions of Willow Run Airport, Lambert Municipal, and Joplin Municipal to "near" the named locations.
Done
- I've changed mentions of Willow Run Airport, Lambert Municipal, and Joplin Municipal to "near" the named locations.
- T.F. Green is six miles south of downtown Providence, and American Airlines did not sell tickets to Warwick, they sold them to Providence, served by an airport in a suburb to the south. I like the suggestion of "near Providence" and similar to other airports, and have made that change in reference to Providence but have not yet hit the other airport articles to determine which of those articles need to be changed from "in" to "near" the named cities. I'll finish those during this review.
- Given the number of intermediate stops, I would recommend just having the count of stops in the infobox and lede. The list of them can stay in the Background section.
- I've dropped the intermediate stops from the lead, since it just clutters the first couple of sentences with trivial detail. I've kept them in the background section. I think the intermediate stops in the infobox don't add unnecessary clutter, so I've left them there, although I'll note that I'm not a mobile user.
Partially implemented
- I do think it makes the infobox rather long - a full screen on both desktops I use - but I won't hold up GA over it. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- I've dropped the intermediate stops from the lead, since it just clutters the first couple of sentences with trivial detail. I've kept them in the background section. I think the intermediate stops in the infobox don't add unnecessary clutter, so I've left them there, although I'll note that I'm not a mobile user.
- The Convair CV-240 family article doesn't mention a "CV-240-0" model, so "CV-240" is probably fine for the infobox.
- I can't vouch for the Convair CV-240 family article, but the CAB report identifies the aircraft as a Corvair 240-0 on page 1 and on page 9.
Not done
- I can't vouch for the Convair CV-240 family article, but the CAB report identifies the aircraft as a Corvair 240-0 on page 1 and on page 9.
- I recommend some sort of geographic view - at very least coordinates. Even better would be a map (perhaps using {{maplink}}) showing the various airports and the crash site.
- That's a great idea, but outside my skill set. I don't have a reliable source that identifies the GPS coordinates of the crash site, just general locations, "Near Tulsa" and "Owsso, Oklahoma". The most precise location I have is the CAB report which states a location of 3.6 miles north of the approach end of runway 17L, but I'm not comfortable drawing a map based on vague locations like that. It's also not a GA criteria item.
Agree
Not done
- I should have clarified earlier - when I do GA reviews, I may make suggestions to improve the article beyond the GA criteria, but I will only pass/fail based on the GA criteria. I've added coordinates based on the description in this source and geographic features mentioned in other sources. I've also added a map using {{Location map+}}, but you're welcome to modify or remove it as you see fit. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's a great idea, but outside my skill set. I don't have a reliable source that identifies the GPS coordinates of the crash site, just general locations, "Near Tulsa" and "Owsso, Oklahoma". The most precise location I have is the CAB report which states a location of 3.6 miles north of the approach end of runway 17L, but I'm not comfortable drawing a map based on vague locations like that. It's also not a GA criteria item.
Background
[edit]- Use semicolons to separate the various airport locations
- RFNirmala beat me to this.
Done
- RFNirmala beat me to this.
The airline had operated...
Either remove "had", or change the final words to "since 1948."Done
- The Passengers and Crew sections should be moved to subsections here (except for the details about injuries suffered, which can go in Aftermath)
- I generally follow the Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide/Layout (Accidents) layout guidelines, which suggests separate sections for passengers and crew, although most of the time there isn't enough reliable information to justify separate sections for each, so I usually combine them into a combined passengers and crew section. From an article flow standpoint, introducing the information about the fatalities before describing the accident itself seems to not fit well, which is why I've placed this section after the description of the events.
Not done
- I generally follow the Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide/Layout (Accidents) layout guidelines, which suggests separate sections for passengers and crew, although most of the time there isn't enough reliable information to justify separate sections for each, so I usually combine them into a combined passengers and crew section. From an article flow standpoint, introducing the information about the fatalities before describing the accident itself seems to not fit well, which is why I've placed this section after the description of the events.
Accident
[edit]- Remove "it" from
then it struck
Not done Maybe it was already fixed, but I can't find the "it" you're referring to.
- "the" is incorrectly capitalized in the second paragraph
Done (Background section)
- If you have the link to TF Green, then link Tulsa International Airport as well
Done (Background section)
- Adjust time formatting per MOS:TIME
Done
- The last sentence can be shortened to
The accident was the first fatal accident that American Airlines had experienced since Flight 476 in August 1955.
The details of that crash aren't relevant here.Done. I think the extra detail provides some context, but that extra detail wasn't actually included in the attached citation, so I've trimmed to something similar to what you have suggested.
Aftermath
[edit]- There's some run-on sentences in this article that could use fixing. The one starting with
After the crash
is a typical example with three commas.
Done. The first sentence you've mentioned is the only sentence I could find with potential issues.
Aircraft
[edit]- When moving this to Background, it can probably become a single paragraph.
Done
- Since the engines weren't significant to the crash, I don't think the details about them are needed. Same with the final sentence of the section.
Done
- Providence to Tulsa isn't what I would usually call a "short-haul route", though I suppose the individual segments were short. Might be worth clarifying.
Done I've linked the short-haul term to the Flight length article and changed the word "routes" to "flights" to make it clearer that it refers to each flight segment. Each of those segments was a fairly short flight, well under the time-based and distance-based definitions outlined in that article.
Passengers and crew
[edit]- I recommend using the same sentence structure to introduce the captain and first officer - right now they're completely different structures for the same set of information.
Done
- With the injuries moved to Aftermath, this can be one paragraph.
Done
Investigation
[edit]- The first paragraph seems like it might fit better in the Aftermath section.
Done
- Change to
The CAB held public hearings in Tulsa on February 27–28, 1957
Done
- The paragraph reading
During the flight...
seems like it's important context for the previous paragraph - it might be worth rearranging some sentences.Done
Other
[edit]- The article can be added to Category:Transportation in Tulsa County, Oklahoma and Category:History of Tulsa County, Oklahoma
Done by RFNirmala.
- For sources that have multiple pages, make sure to include the link to the second page in the citation.
Done
- Are any images of the crash itself available? I imagine local newspapers may have had photos that could be valid for fair use.
Not done. Online newspaper archive scans are pretty low quality, those low-quality images would not significantly add to the article, and would probably run into WP:FUC. That said, I've noticed that the Tulsa Tribune, the Tulsa Daily World, and the Forth Worth Star-Telegram articles are likely {{PD-US-no notice}} at a quick glance, so if the images weren't actually lousy, they might be usable, if they were credited to their own photographers and not to wire services.
- That said, I actually found a couple of photos from the Tulsa Daily World that are of acceptable quality that I'm working on getting uploaded.
Done Found two decent photos and uploaded them.
- Source check: 2, 3, 5, 7, and 11 all support the claims they're cited for. I assume that the timetable is just to cite the airports, as it doesn't actually list flight 327 (which was presumably added in the 22 months between the timetable and the crash). Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Overall
[edit]- GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
- a (reference section):
b (inline citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Categories:
- Wikipedia good articles
- Engineering and technology good articles
- GA-Class aviation articles
- GA-Class Aviation accident articles
- Aviation accident task force articles
- WikiProject Aviation articles
- GA-Class Disaster management articles
- Low-importance Disaster management articles
- GA-Class Death articles
- Low-importance Death articles
- GA-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- GA-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- GA-Class Oklahoma articles
- Low-importance Oklahoma articles