Jump to content

Talk:Boeing 787 Dreamliner: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 78: Line 78:




Please update the map 787 operators. Azerbaijan use two Boeing 787
Please update the map 787 operators. Azerbaijan use two Boeing 787 [[Special:Contributions/185.30.89.124|185.30.89.124]] ([[User talk:185.30.89.124|talk]]) 18:09, 9 April 2015 (UTC)Aydin

Revision as of 18:09, 9 April 2015


Air India

Just challenged the addition of an entry on Air India problems and the fact that they have a number of aircraft grounded as spares sources, it is clear that all but two aircraft have flown today, one flew yesterday and one is on maintenance. Borrowing bits from an aircraft on maintenance is not notable. The other issues appear to have been cleared up quickly so unless User:Wikimucker can gain consensus for the Air India section it can be removed, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 20:11, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This was fully referenced and the phrase "A Couple" is used in the Times of India. If you have EG archived Transponder Data _showing_ that all but one of their 787 fleet are on the move in the last 72 hours or so then I will accept that the Times of India have misreported the number of 787s that are being cannibalised for parts in the recent past.

But there is nothing whatsoever wrong with my attribution and the Times of India is hardly a tabloid. If you provide the movement evidence you assert you have access to I will of course leave the article as is. Reminder > http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Now-Dreamliner-grounded-in-Hong-Kong/articleshow/37994368.cms

Wikimucker (talk) 20:22, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I checked all of the planes listed here > http://www.planespotters.net/Production_List/Boeing/787?sort=reg&p=3

All are showing as active in the last 72 hours bar VT-ANI > http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/vt-ani

The Times of India was wrong. Lets leave it at that shall we??? :)

Wikimucker (talk) 20:44, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking. -Fnlayson (talk) 20:53, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mind you User:MilborneOne VT-ANI has been grounded for almost 3 months now > http://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/VT-ANI Wikimucker (talk) 21:42, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Minor incidents removed

I've removed several minor incidents from the Accidents section, most of which already have consensuses to be removed in the preceding sections. I also propose that we change the hidden note to require consensus to readd them after they've been removed as being minor. The wording of the current hidden note just adds unneeded alarmism, and isn't the way such incidents are generally handled in aircraft articles. - BilCat (talk) 03:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have had a tweak of the note see what you think. MilborneOne (talk) 19:27, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What you have looks good, but we might want to keep the mention of WP:AIRCRASH, even though it's not a working link. - BilCat (talk) 22:54, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of two United 787s at "Los Angeles International Airport"

United 787s at LAX or SFO airport?

I changed the quotation on the image of two United Airlines' 787s at "Los Angeles International Airport" to "San Francisco International Airport", which is correct. I was challenged on this, and now I am justifying my edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.9.26.228 (talk) 20:52, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Based on what though? I think the photographer should know where he/she was when the photo was taken. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:09, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Similar https://www.flickr.com/photos/jss8699ca/8369770790/ also says LAX. MilborneOne (talk) 23:39, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article formatting issues

There appear to be a few formatting issues on the page (the image thumbnail problem is present throughout the entire article) which are not present on any other articles. I took a brief look at the page source, nothing looks wrong, and oddly enough, when previewing the page (i.e., click edit → show preview), it renders correctly. What's going on? Procellam (talk) 02:49, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Terrible teens

There is an article about their purchase (finally) but I can't find any prior info about them on the page or archives. Is that a decision which I somehow missing? Ashtul (talk) 18:25, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a news service. A mention is fine but no need to restate info on weight issue with the early 787s that is already in the article. Also, 10 aircraft is not a lot with Boeing producing about that many 787s a month now. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:31, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Please update the map 787 operators. Azerbaijan use two Boeing 787 185.30.89.124 (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2015 (UTC)Aydin[reply]