Talk:United Air Lines Flight 736

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleUnited Air Lines Flight 736 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 18, 2009Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 11, 2009.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the 1958 mid-air collision of United Airlines Flight 736 and a U.S. Air Force F-100 Super Sabre, with no survivors, is the deadliest crash in the history of Las Vegas?
On this day...A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 21, 2020.

Looking for official CAB report[edit]

For some unknown reason, the Dept. of Transportation website ( http://specialcollection.dotlibrary.dot.gov/ ) that holds a collection of historical CAB accident reports is missing this important, yet strangely forgotten, incident. I'm surprised there was no wikipedia article for this mid-air collision until this week, and even more surprised when I found out the CAB report isn't available where it should be, even though non-notable 1958 aviation incidents have downloadable reports at the DoT site. If anyone happens to find the CAB report online somewhere, please post the link in the article. Thank you, --Itsfullofstars (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The CAB report can be found as part of a compendium of multiple reports. Here's a Google Books link, including the page offset. I'll leave it to a Wikipedia expert to fit it into the article. https://books.google.com/books?id=rXxMLAbOpwUC&pg=RA15-PA1 Doug Pardee (talk) 20:46, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding the report! I struggled with trying to use the google book link as a citation source. However, I just added an external link in the article to a 7-page PDF version of an ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) Circular from 1959 that covers the collision. I stumbled on it while doing a google search of the registration number for the United DC-7. Eventually I hope to use the ICAO circular as a primary source for citations, but I'm not sure I'll have time for now. To make sure the report doesn't disappear I also added it to web.archive.org. Note: At the time I added the external link I thought it was the official CAB report, but after comparing it to the google book link you provided, I realize it's not. --Itsfullofstars (talk) 23:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
UPDATE: The offset to the correct page in the above Google Books URL has changed. It's now https://books.google.com/books?id=rXxMLAbOpwUC&pg=RA16-PA1# I think I can put the link in the article now. Hopefully it won't change again. —Itsfullofstars (talk) 18:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
UPDATE II: Well, the Google Books offset to the right page has stopped working AGAIN. No matter. Awhile ago extracted the Flight 736 pages from the compendium of CAB reports, and uploaded them to the Internet Archive. The Google Books compendium is no longer needed for the purposes of this article, but a big thanks again to Doug Pardee for finding the original. The main article page has the (hopefully permanent!) link to the Internet Archive version that contains ONLY the United Flight 736 accident report. No offsets required. Itsfullofstars (talk) 15:26, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:United Airlines Flight 736/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ---Dough4872 22:44, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments:

  1. "the United airliner" sounds colliqual. This is in multiple places.
  2. Are the notes in the article supported by references?
  3. "approach to Nellis" also sounds colliqual.
  4. "Decatur Blvd.": "Blvd." needs to be spelled out.
  5. Citation needed for the list of the two nearby crash sites.
  6. The bulleted list of crash sites should be turned into prose.
  7. Are there any picutres of the crash that can be added to the article?

I am placing the article on hold. ---Dough4872 22:44, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to review the article.

  1. Fixed.
  2. Three of the four notes already had references. It was a little bit tricky to get the imbedded references to work within a note. Having to nest using the #tag template isn't very intuitive. I've commented out the uncited note because I now believe it's no longer needed. I only needed it early on when I was just starting out with the article, and I had many fewer sources to work with. Now that I've found other authoritative sources that by sheer numbers overrule the couple of websites that have incorrect last names for two of the crew members, I don't think it's necessary to explicitly tell the reader which last names are correct for two of the crew.
  3. Fixed.
  4. Fixed.
  5. Fixed.
  6. Fixed.
  7. I've been looking for photographs extensively. I found generally poor quality photos of the crash site but it appears they are still under copyright to various agencies like AP. I've also tried to find a free photo of a United Airlines DC-7 without luck, so far. One possible photo I might be able to use is alleged to be 'Copyright Civil Aeronautics Board', but since that was a U.S. Government agency I suspect it's actually public domain. The photo is already mentioned in the article, but only as an external link, here. --Itsfullofstars (talk) 03:06, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will pass the article. ---Dough4872 03:08, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. An update: I sent an email to the Aviation Safety Network and they changed the copyright assertion to public domain for the photo I mentioned above. It's now in the infobox. I'm still looking for a free image of a United Airlines DC-7, preferably in flight, to complement the photo of the F-100F. I still haven't found a copy of the official accident report for this crash, either. I guess I'll have to make do with the sources I I've already found. --Itsfullofstars (talk) 04:36, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Collision" section[edit]

Could anyone whos English is the first language check the section "Collision" please? I can see it's a bit grama mess and errors with "a/the/an". If noone here is a native English speaker, I'd ask someone here to review this section gramaticaly. Michalpro (talk) 00:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC) michalpro[reply]

Michalpro, I created and wrote the article. I don't understand where the 'grama mess' is that seems to be bothering you. English is my native language. --Itsfullofstars (talk) 09:40, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I fell like those three: at too low an altitude to survive /.../ a hilly, uninhabited area of desert /.../ it was determined to be the drag parachute that is meant to be deployed

should be:

at (a) too low altitude to survive /.../ a hilly, uninhabited area of the desert /.../ it was determined to be a drag parachute that is meant to be deployed Michalpro (talk) 18:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)michalpro[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. Although the changes are subtle and I've gone ahead and modified two sentences, but "at too low an altitude" is already proper English. Google shows 62,900 hits for the exact phrase "at too low an altitude" but only 19 hits for "at a too low altitude", so I'm leaving that sentence as-is. --Itsfullofstars (talk) 21:14, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on United Airlines Flight 736. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:12, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on United Airlines Flight 736. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 21:16, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

windscreen/windshield[edit]

For no good reason that I can see, the article alternates between the British term "windscreen" (which occurs four times) and the American term "windshield" (which occurs twice). A choice should surely be made, depending on which form of English the rest of the article is in.188.230.248.85 (talk) 12:41, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done: The article should be in American English, though one use of "windscreen" was a direct quote from the (American) source, and two others were misquotes in our text. I've fixed them now. Swanny18 (talk) 13:08, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Film?[edit]

Wasn’t there a film made about this in the 60s? I vaguely remember seeing it when I was a kid. What stuck in my mind was a discussion about whether to go up or down when faced with an imminent collision (the answer was to go up, which meant you’d probably survive, though the other guy wouldn’t; it foreshadowed the end, when the same pilot flew down when he realized the other plane was an airliner). Swanny18 (talk) 12:42, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out it was the The Crowded Sky I was thinking of; but the film isn't based on this incident specifically. Ah well, Swanny18 (talk) 18:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Working to get external links fixed[edit]

Just a note to say I'm working on getting various broken web URLs fixed. Over time they've suffered from link rot. Will use Internet Archive when applicable. −Itsfullofstars (talk) 18:25, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It appears the crash site has been covered by commercial development[edit]

Hello, I'm the wikipedian who created this article, and over the years have been building it to the point where I'm responsible for over 90% of the content, based on the page stats. Some time ago I noticed the lot containing the main crash site where the airliner fuselage impacted was for sale, using this website ( https://www.redfin.com/NV/Las-Vegas/4765-W-Rush-Ave-89141/home/166562752 ). I had hoped the crash location would eventually be protected and a memorial or historical marker would be installed, but I just checked the location via the web (I live about 9 hours drive away, so checking in person will have to wait until my next Vegas vacation) and it looks like a self-storage business has paved over the site.

The Google Maps satellite view as I'm writing this on June 9 2021 is out-of-date, and still shows it as a patch of untouched desert, but the Acme mapper is more current and shows construction under way, while Yelp shows a completed business on the site. Since this is original research (I assume), I can't add this information to the main article.— Itsfullofstars (talk) 00:07, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I just learned that since 2018, maybe even earlier, a parking lot has covered the main Fight 736 crash site. Since this information is from the Las Vegas Review-Journal website, I've added it to the article. I may have to adjust the coordinates slightly, since a contact who has local knowledge has told me that the current coordinates are off a bit. — Itsfullofstars (talk) 00:50, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Despite my concerns about original research, I've decided to add to the article that yet more commercial development has covered a good portion of a small nearby hill where the unofficial memorial once stood, since Google Earth street view proves it (Google Maps as of June 2021 is behind the times a bit). I hope that someone with local knowledge will read the article and contribute more definite information. — Itsfullofstars (talk) 18:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I commented-out one sentence that I added four days ago that mentioned the new construction described immediately above. I didn't feel comfortable bending the rules, even though I openly admit this whole issue is an example of me making a mountain out of a mole hill. Realistically, It's likely that nobody on wikipedia (besides myself) cares that the crash site, hill and all, will be totally covered soon, without any form of memorial remaining. Even so, maybe I'll ask the experts at WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard for guidance about using Google Earth street view as a source. I just feel, rightly or wrongly, that people reading the article should be aware that a new commercial building has covered the west half the hill. — Itsfullofstars (talk) 01:28, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:1955 MacArthur Airport United Airlines crash which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:20, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:United_Air_Lines_Flight_736&oldid=1205831975"