Jump to content

Talk:One-Two-Go Airlines Flight 269

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 73.87.74.115 (talk) at 22:33, 11 January 2019 (→What do you think of the nationality chart I made?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Passenger itinerary

This is claiming to be a reliable source as a passenger list. First off I'm uneasy about placing this here until families etc are notified, secondly, is it reliable? The Rambling Man 18:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks reliable, but I'm not positive. I would hold off posting it until we can get someone who speaks the language to check it out properly. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 19:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure the passenger manifest is reliable because that's an official copy prepared by the airlines. What's important is that it doesn't indicate survivors and dead passengers, so I think it can be put up as only a reference to who's on board. Bonchygeez 20:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Number of Dutch involved

I don't want to screw up the referencing of the number of nationalities involved, but there were two Dutch people on the plane, one man and one woman. This has been confirmed by the Thai Minister for Health. See "Twee Nederlanders gewond bij vliegramp Thailand". NRC Handelsblad. 2007-09-16. Retrieved 2007-09-16. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help). How should this information be processed? Splitting the nationalities by bullets? AecisBrievenbus 20:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting into nationalities into bullets would good. But for now, let's wait for the finalised list of nationalities before posting. Bonchygeez 21:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably a good way of maintaining the accuracy of the information in the short term, while it's changing. After it stabilises, prose is a much better way of presenting information in an article. -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 12:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other pages recording the event

These pages also record the incident. As the fatalities number is still increasing, please edit these pages too as the event progresses.

Thanks~ - PeterCX&Talk 11:35, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How many pilots were there

I've been reading through news reports and there seems to be only mention of one pilot, Captain Airef, a 56-year-old Indonesian, at the controls of the flight. I really don't think there's only one pilot. Anyone knows? Bonchygeez 02:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As usual for a MD-80, there were two pilots: the captain, who was at the controls and thus primarily responsible, and a first officer. Jpatokal 02:50, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Article states "The NTSB determined the cause of the crash to be "flight crew error", as the first officer was inadequately trained and inexperienced and the captain of the flight was incapacitated at the time of the crash." but there's no citation, and it seems very relevant to ask in what way was the captain incapitated. ----

Language

"Phuket" was never a good transliteration of the Thai word. However, that's got to be the worst phonetic transliteration I have ever seen. "Poo-get" is much, much closer. "poock-eht" is bad because: firstly you separate the two syllables in the wrong place; I can't imagine what value the c adds and finally the "gor gai" character should give a 'g' sound in this case. And yes I am thinking of how non-native English speakers would pronounce this too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.123.113.87 (talk) 09:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The pronunciation of the name is pretty much totally irrelevant to the article, so I've just nuked it entirely. (FWIW, I agree that "Poo-get" is about the closest you'll get in English.) Jpatokal 04:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality of crew members

What is the nationality of the crew members? WhisperToMe 10:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-NPOV

Much of the article consists of attacks on airline which were added by User:InvestigateUdom and have not been attributed to reliable sources. --58.10.216.134 (talk) 10:00, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Documents

These files from British coroners are hosted on the Investigate Udom website. They are reliable sources, even if the commentary from the website owner is not.

WhisperToMe (talk) 05:41, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality tag

I've added a {{NPOV}} tag and this is why:

  • Blocked editor InvestigateUdom (talk · contribs) has created a large amount of this article - clearly biased, and now blocked, the content should be verified and cited.
  • A lot of the "Recovery" section is unreferenced. This isn't WP:BLP but it's important that we cite things that relate to incidents such as this.
  • It needs work because it seems to be written as if it's still an ongoing issue, it happened four years ago.
  • Most of the controversial issues link to a website called "investigateudom.com" which clearly has a conflict of interest.

The Rambling Man (talk) 21:10, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, i removed some stuff a while ago that wasnt referenced. Anything referenced on investigateudom.com should be discounted as it isnt a reliable source. --JetBlast (talk) 22:48, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers don't add up

The box says that there were 130 people on board, 89 of them were killed in the accident, 40 survived. That doesn't quite add up, one of the passengers is obviously neither counted among the dead nor among the surviviors. The figure of 89 is in the NTSB report, so is the total number of passengers. From this source one would deduce a number of survivors of 41. On the other hand the entry on Aviation Safety Network gives 90 dead and 40 survivors stating as source: "NTSB". Could it be that there was one person initially surviving the accident and then dying later on? Then it may depend on the timeframe which person would still count as a survivor and which one as a death victim. So I hope there is anybody who can shed some light on this. --88.73.55.87 (talk) 15:07, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on One-Two-GO Airlines Flight 269. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Runway discrepancy

This sections starts with an uncited statement "According to ICAO standards, the runway at an international airport must be at least 150 meters wide". The main runways at JFK, LAX, SFO are all 61m wide, and those at O'Hare just 46m, so that seems doubtful. Can someone provide a reference for what the true minimum is. 80.2.106.75 (talk) 13:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pilots

It talks a lot about what the pilots did and didn't do, but it never mentions anywhere whether they were among the dead. I assume they were killed, but it would be nice if it confirmed this in the article. I'm also a bit skeptical about all these highly biased claims against the airline. They may be completely or partially true, but this sort of attack also seems to be considered normal industrial warfare in the region; if you can use the press, innuendo and false claims backed up by "documents" you can do great damage to a competitor. They fully recognize how much everyone loves scandal, assigning blame and jumping onto bandwagons. Makes our media scandal orgies in the US seem pretty tame in comparison. Even if it were all perfectly true, the fact that the real motivation of 2/3rds of the people in the anti-airline group is that they are hoping by making the airline responsible they can maybe make some big money...either in a courtroom once the public opinion is whipped up enough, or more likely the instigators hope to be bribed to shut up. I may be wrong, but I've heard of similar cases before.

64.223.110.149 (talk) 08:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of the nationality chart I made?

NationalityPassengersCrewDeadTotal
 Thailand4574252
 United Kingdom100810
 Israel100810
 France100910
 United States5055
 Germany5015
 Ireland4014
 Sweden4024
 Iran3003
 Australia2012
 Netherlands2002
 Austria1001
 Italy1001
Total123789130

73.87.74.115 (talk) 22:33, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:One-Two-Go_Airlines_Flight_269&oldid=877944652"