Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

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

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6: 30 days

Help needed at formatting names on list and on death image montage

Click to come to the image page:

Naming the tragic event in the articles head title

Why don't we mention the tragic event in the main title? Like for example 2001 shootdown Siberia Airlines Flight 1812 is much informative than just the flight number, no? It's what we do with all other types of tragic events. Sidney.Cortez (talk) 00:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sidney.Cortez It mostly has to do with a combination of WP:COMMONNAME and WP:OVERPRECISION. For most aviation accidents and incidents involving civilian airliners, the flight number is most commonly used by reliable secondary sources to refer to the event. Furthermore, adding the time and type of incident, such as adding "2001 shootdown" to "Siberia Airlines Flight 1812", is most often unnecessary disambiguation unless there are more than one accident/incident with the same flight number. Per WP:OVERPRECISION, "titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that." - ZLEA _T\^C 02:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @ZLEA,

Thanks for your reply. But some titles don't fall under the disambiguation rule like Murder of Joana Cipriano or Killing of Sanda Dia?

Greetings, Sidney.Cortez (talk) 22:28, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, they do. Those articles are on the murders/killings rather than the victims themselves. While you may argue that aviation accident and incident articles are on the accidents rather than the flight numbers themselves, aviation accidents are unique in that the accidents themselves are most often referred to by the flight numbers. - ZLEA _T\^C 23:50, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are different types of aviation accidents. With Sabena Flight 571 or Korean Air Flight 858 you know it's an aviation incident but not what kind immediately. You got to start reading the article before you know it. Hijacking of Sabena Flight 571 and Bombing of Korean Air Flight 858 is more adequate informative, which is more important than "unnecessary disambiguation". Especially for common wiki-readers.

I would state that would be "balanced precision", rather than overprecision. And just using flight numbers right now is underprecision. Sidney.Cortez (talk) 01:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You do make a valid point, though I'm not sure I agree with it. Perhaps you should open a formal RfC to encourage more users to weigh in on this. - ZLEA _T\^C 01:25, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @ZLEA, I asked on RfC for help. They ask what to do: Starting RfC on a new page or here. What do you think? Thanks, Sidney.Cortez (talk) 15:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would probably be best to start an RfC on this talk page, as it will be more likely catch the attention of those who are more knowledgeable in aviation accidents and incidents. - ZLEA _T\^C 18:44, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accidents/RAM/RJ

Hi there - I saw this edit @Jetstreamer made on Royal Air Maroc correctly undoing an addition as unsourced. This accident actually has its own article 1975 Agadir Royal Air Maroc Boeing 707 crash which was not linked in the uncited edit.

However, this led me to two questions which I thought I'd bring up:

The accident is listed on Royal Jordanian but not on Royal Air Maroc. I know that accidents are usually listed on the operating carrier's article, but I'm not sure what policy/guideline that comes from. I'm unsure if this should be the case when it's a charter flight for another carrier.
It seems the article was renamed last month without discussion. I'm not sure what the correct name would be here but it seems inconsistent to me that we would list the crash under Royal Jordanian, but not Royal Air Maroc, while the name of the article is "Royal Air Maroc crash".

Figured I'd just ask these questions here for you given your involvement and knowledge of aviation style/guidelines (and tag @Steelpillow and @Ckfasdf who are also knowledgable) for discussion. Avgeekamfot (talk) 18:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about air crash articles, so I have posted a request for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 21:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Avgeekamfot: it's an interesting question. I guess the main question is on how we treat accident that involves charter flight for another carrier. I don't think we have guideline or consensus of such case yet, see WP:AVTITLE. And, I also think it would better to discuss it on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force instead of other editor talkpage. Ckfasdf (talk) 22:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair. I initially started writing on Jetstreamer's talk page to explain why I was undoing his revert, then it morphed into questions that I thought you + @Steelpillow would also be helpful with. I'll move this discussion where you suggest. Avgeekamfot (talk) 23:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above copied from: User talk:Jetstreamer (with minor adjustments) to continue discussion here ~~~~ Avgeekamfot (talk) 23:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To start with, linking to another article is not sourcing per WP:V, which is a basic policy. That's the reason why I removed the addition.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 12:13, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, to be clear, that's why I noted that you correctly undid the edit. But seeing it (I'm watching most of the alliance-member airlines) led me to the two questions I listed out above. Avgeekamfot (talk) 17:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My first thought is that this information appears to be WP:Glossary#verifiable, and it was reverted because it was WP:Glossary#uncited. (Please do click those links and read about the difference; it's important.)

When you personally know that material is verifiable (for example, you are fairly sure you could find a reliable source for that information with a quick visit to your favorite search engine or by walking over to your bookshelf), then the best, policy-endorsed practice is for you to WP:PRESERVE that information by adding a citation. Another policy-endorsed practice is for you to tag that information with {{citation needed}} (I suggest pinging the adding editor so they know that some more work is needed there).

What's not actually endorsed by policy is:

I treat the addition of good, relevant information that I personally believe could be cited as some sort of Mother May I? children's game, so if you don't add the citation the first time, you have to start all over, or
I revert information that doesn't belong in the article at all, and instead of saying that it doesn't belong in the article, I claim that it's just because it's uncited.

(Of course, if you don't know anything about the subject, then you will mistakenly remove good information. That's a risk in our system.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:56, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]