Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Korean Air Lines Flight 007/1
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Delisted buidhe 17:44, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
"Well-written" violations: There is some puffery (i.e. "single-handedly" in Interim Developments) and editorialization (i.e. "really" in "continues to believe that he shot down a spy plane, when he really shot down a passenger aircraft"). Often, quotes are included as standalone sentences in jarring manners (i.e. "The border guards. What ships do we now have near Moneron Island, if they are civilians, send [them] there immediately.").
--BalinKingOfMoria (talk) 22:50, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- The Flight deviation from assigned route section is difficult to follow. I am not going to touch the technical aspects of it as I know this can be a touchy subject for some, but it seems a convoluted way of saying the flight deviated from its expected route. Statements like
The inability to establish direct radio communications to be able to transmit their position directly did not alert the pilots of KAL 007 of their ever-increasing divergence
is just poorly written whatever the technical standpoint. We have so much detail that as well as making it a chore to read we are heading pretty close into focus trerritory. The transcripts are not clearly formatted, we have details on all the damage to different parts of the plane under their own headings and other formatting and overdetail issues that bring down the quality. Sourcing doesn't seem up to standard, there is a lot of uncited content especially in the popular culture section. AIRcorn (talk) 03:19, 18 April 2020 (UTC)