Revision as of 07:06, 7 September 2023 editBilCat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers215,714 edits Undid revision 1174241641 by MPGuy2824 (talk) I already switched last weekTag: Undo← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:12, 7 September 2023 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,373,492 editsm Archiving 1 discussion to User talk:BilCat/archive25. (BOT)Next edit → | ||
Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
* ] | * ] | ||
}} | }} | ||
== Cessna Citation II deletion == | |||
Hello and good day. You reverted my addition for May 3, 2007 incident that seemed to fit the criteria for WP:Aircrash. It was sourced as well with Aviation Safety Network. Could have used the NTSB report as well as more reliable. Seemed like a credible addition to me. Have a good day.] (]) 13:43, 23 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
:I doubt the NTSB report would make a difference, per the ]. Perhaps ] could explain it better? ] (]) 17:14, 23 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
::I have reviewed the addition: {{tq|May 3, 2007: a Cessna Citation 550, N22HP crashed on approach to ] because of inflight loss of control for undetermined reasons. Both occupants were killed.}} It was a non-notable accident and should have been removed, especially as it was "cause: undetermined", as there were no lessons learned there. Basically there have been many, many Citation II crashes, we don't list them all. As per ] we only add them if a notable person was killed (ie one with an existing bio on Misplaced Pages) or unless there is some lasting effect, like a fleet grounding, mandatory modifications, an ] or something similar, as a result of the crash. Occasionally we will keep an accident that doesn't make that criteria, just because it was unusual, like the ] which is still in the article and has its own stand-alone article, as well. - ] (]) 17:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
== WP:Thumbsize == | == WP:Thumbsize == |
Revision as of 20:12, 7 September 2023
This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
Before posting, please read and follow the notes below.
|
Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 14.5 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
WP:Thumbsize
Want to let you know I am now studying this item. Thanks! Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 20:18, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Re: Sukhoi Su-57 edit
The cited source says that the codename has not been confirmed by NATO. Regardless of reliability guidelines re: the website it was published on, how does an unconfirmed rumor support information presented authoritatively on Misplaced Pages? Perhaps removing it was overkill, but other options are to present it as a rumored codename or to cite a different source. It was not done in bad faith; I just investigated the cited source since the claim interested me and was surprised to find that it was not as authoritative as the article suggested. 84.251.71.133 (talk) 14:45, 31 August 2023 (UTC)