Talk:Air Canada Flight 759

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Air Canada Flight 759 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Aviation: Accidents

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the Aviation accident project.

This article was nominated for deletion on 10 August 2017. The result of the discussion was keep.

Onesource tag

The {{onesource}} tag states that the article heavily depends on the San Jose Mercury News. Seven out of 22 sources in less than one-third, so this fails heavily. Presumably the SJMN is a local news source. These can often be better than national sources for detailed information on an event.

Any objections to the removal of the template? Mjroots (talk) 10:56, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tag has been removed. Mjroots (talk) 15:07, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I put the template because of WP:OVERCITE in the lead, and the SJMN titles are sensationalist. The article would benefit from references being replaced by more factual, aerospace press references: aviationweek or flightglobal, flying mag, flight safety, aviationtoday...). The article improved since the template was put tough. --Marc Lacoste (talk) 20:58, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Crew members’ names

Could I insert names of AC 759 and UA 1 crew members from NTSB Docket into the article text or this is somehow inappropriate? --Лушников Владимир Александрович (talk) 15:53, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We dont normally list crew names unless otherwise notable of pertinent to the final report. MilborneOne (talk) 16:01, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, okay then. --Лушников Владимир Александрович (talk) 16:19, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The crew names have now been widely reported in reliable secondary sources; e.g. [1], [2]. CapitalSasha ~ talk 16:37, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Doesnt make them noteworthy. MilborneOne (talk) 16:39, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion about survivors

I propose that, given the direct involvement of other planes in this incident, the stated number of survivors should include not only those on board but also people on the other planes (at least the estimate from the official report). Wilhem275 (talk) 19:55, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]