Talk:TWA Flight 800

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about TWA Flight 800. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about TWA Flight 800 at the Reference desk.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 17, 2004, July 17, 2005, July 18, 2007, July 18, 2010, July 17, 2011, and July 17, 2016.

On 27 December 2021, it was proposed that this article be TWA Flight 800 (1996). The result of the discussion was not moved.

New York (state) Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Aviation: Accidents
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.

United States: FBI Low‑importance

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. This article is supported by WikiProject FBI (assessed as Mid-importance).

Death Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

October 2001 - May 2007 June 2007 - December 2009 January 2010 - June 2021

One of the big issues of this crash was the way family members and the passenger list was mishandled. In fact, Swissair Flight 111 even mentions this as something to learn from. It's actually why I landed on this article because I wondered what TWA did, but having read the article, I do not see anything but a brief mention and it's not even elaborated on. If time allows, I will try to write a section on that. I feel that this is significant because it too was a contributing factor in the aftermath. In fact, in a very left handed kind of way, the TWA response is nodded too via the law change mentioned in the 4th paragraph of the Aftermath section. MagnoliaSouth ^(talk) 08:11, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to post the article that mentions TWA though they are not the focus of the article: Airlines act swiftly to help relatives New U.S. law required detailed emergency plan. MagnoliaSouth ^(talk) 15:32, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So @Andrewgprout:, could you explain this revert [1] you conducted? I don't understand why you described it as "Not an improvement" or "unconstructive". Thank you for your kind understanding. Username006 (talk) 07:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, as a third opinion – I would say the level of precision is a bit much. I am reviewing the NTSB report and even they reference the plane as "TWA flight 800" and then "TWA 800". In other words, the existing page was sufficient. Adding to it would be going into

excessive detail. – The Grid (talk) 17:07, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

@The Grid: I do not mean to offend you by any means but I assume some form of consensus that using the IATA and ICAO in the brackets is the usual norm for the lead of an article. Such as Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. I do not think overprecision is a reasonable justification to revert. Also, going through the NTSB report, it is evident that the phrase TWA flight 800 is used more often than TWA 800. Username006 (talk) 17:53, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Username006: no, adding all possible flight numbers in the first line of the lead is not the norm and to my knowledge no consensus has been established about it, despite some articles showing that information. Flight numbers are already clearly listed in the infobox, and adding them to the text does not necessarily improve it, unless the flight number has entered common usage (such as with TWA 800 and unlike TW800). --Deeday-UK (talk) 20:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Deeday-UK: Thank you. Username006 (talk) 03:30, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note the addition of the icao/iata flight numbers in the infobox is fairly recent so some articles still have them in the lead paragraph although the lead should include the most common flight format, in this case TWA800. MilborneOne (talk) 12:27, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit my initial revert and edit summary was mostly in response to the replacement of "TWA" with "flight" in the image caption text and the previous edit summary was ambiguous so I had no idea why this was changed. My revert edit summary "Not an Improvement" is not the same as "Unconstructive" which was your word above not used by me. I see such edits as this as not being necessary even though the result is of similar meaning and intent - and randomly twiddling with words is time wasting and ultimately disruptive. On the subject of the multiple flight numbers I see this as not particularly helpful to readers of the encyclopaedia. Andrewgprout (talk) 00:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by reviewer, closed by Launchballer talk 15:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

( Comment or view )

( Article history links:

• Eastwind Airlines Flight 517
• TWA Flight 800

)

The Eastwind Aircraft in August of 1995

• ... that N221US, an airplane which had suffered a near crash due to rudder failures, had witnessed the explosion of the third worst aircraft crash in US history a month after ?

• Source: "The Flight 800 Investigation

• Reviewed:

Created by Arhan D (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Arhan D (talk) 22:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• WP:DYKG before nominating anything else.--Launchballer 23:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]