|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to . If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.|
|WikiProject Biography / Arts and Entertainment||(Rated Start-class)|
The "critical" posts were all ranging around the following pattern:
Mr. Sharkey,(the man most idiot of the world) you’ve been talking without any respect to the 155 people killed in that tragic accident. No respect to their country and its people. Only you and a few other knows how close to the truth are your statement about the accident. Ah, God also knows. If you’re really telling the truth, I wish God bless you, but, if you not, I feel terribly sorry about your destiny. Thing again on what you have said. Still have time. The Captain of that plane was a fantastic professional and deserve to be preserved from lies and omitions. Don’t play with truth. Cause, if you lying, and I believe you are, some how you gone pay for it. Posted by George Melo Junior on 10.5.06 at 06:22 PM
Mr. Sharkey. I am able to understand your position, in order to “absolve” the pilots of the airplane, where you were a passenger. Helsinki Syndrome explains it. I can assure you, that our aeronautical authorities, will not treat “your pilots” , in the same way british police treated our folk, in the London tubes. Posted by Honorio Vargas on 10.7.06 at 09:24 AM
These have been posted as comments to the following article on the collision:
They are signed with Brazilian names and speak from the perspective of Brazilians. Unless non-Brazilians are trying to pass for Brazilians, it's safe to say that *all* of the "critical" comments were made by Brazilians. --Ricardo Dirani 18:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Joe Sharkey's Blog is back on www.joesharkey.com with the comments link disabled and Sharkey commenting on the hate mail and comments. --Ricardo Dirani 12:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
As regards the Legacy jet crash that seems to be linked to Gol Airlines Boeing 737-800 loss at same time and place (Amazon Rainforest) the central point of the findings seems that it will be, in a nutshell, the following:
North-South axis air traffic going to West, in "double lane" airways, ought to fly at an EVEN flight level. Legacy pilots are on record that they were flying at 37,000 feet [an ODD figure flight level (FL)] - However, Legacy Captain signed a Flight Plan stating that he would be flying at 38,000 feet AN EVEN FL, between Teres and Manaus, Brazil... A Captain is the sole responsible for his flight plan and it is his duty to prepare same, sign and deliver it (It goes without saying that he is also bound to abide to it). This is the central issue of this crash. Now, how can a Captain, who actually PREPARED, signed, and DELIVERED above Flight Plan to the Brazilian Air Control Authorities state that ... he was flying at 37,000 instead of the approved 38,000 level for Teres-Manaus leg? The answer will solve this crash cause.
--Ricardo de Faria 12:27, 04:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Flight Data Recorder
A small point - hopefully only a matter of terminology. The writer states that "preliminary analysis of the...flight data recorder [FDR] show[s]...that air traffic controllers tried to contact the pilots at least 5 times in the 15 minutes prior to the collision but no attempts were made by the pilots to reply...". The FDR only records aircraft performance; it does not record air-ground communications or cockpit-area sounds, such as pilot conversations or radio communications. The paragraph is not factual as is.
A Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), if installed on the aircraft, would record attempted communications between the pilots and air traffic control. The writer presumably intended to refer to the CVR, not the FDR. In either case, a citation is called for to support the writer's statement, since none of the information cited is yet public.
As with all other other sources surrounding the GOL 1907 crash, authoritative commentary from investigative authorities is limited and speculation is rampant. It is important to limit Wiki contributions to information from credible, cited sources.Tel5959 04:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Commentary removed from article
Mr. Sharkey has reinstated his blog at www.joesharkey.com, which provides his "updates" on the status of the crash investigatio, and particularly, the status of the pilot and co-pilot's situation in Brazil. Mr. Sharkey remains highly critical of the situation and calls Brazil "wonderland," making numerous and repeated references to Alice in Wonderland. His blog has been highly incendiary in Brazil, because of his sarcastic tone, and continued claims of a political conspiracy. Mr. Sharkey's conspiracy theories commenced on the basis of Brazil's presidential elections, which were pending at the time of the accident. Following the end of the elections, he's been unable to blame the elections for his conspiracy claim, and blames the issue on general "political and financial reasons."
Mr. Sharkey's claim that the pilot and co-pilot are being held hostage and detained against international law are completly empty and unsupported by the US State Department, Brazilian authorities or international organizations. The pilot and co-pilot are free to move about Brazil, but may not leave the country. They are confined to a geographical area of 8.5 million square miles -- hardly solitary confinement. This type of confinement is not dissimilar to the type existin in the United States, imposed by States according to their exercise of police powers, preventing suspects from leaving a particular state's boundaries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk • contribs) (removed from article) 02:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Is the "Blog Controversy" section necessary?
Now that it is a few months later and passions have cooled somewhat, is it really necessary to have the painfully detailed "blog controversy" section? I can't find any non-Wikipedia references that document the blog goings-on.
-- Loremipsum 16:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Airline crash section of article
This section is far, far too long. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; it provides summaries, and links to sources that can provide lots of details for those interested. The section needs to be sharply reduced, per WP:UNDUE. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:41, 5 December 2014 (UTC)