Talk:Nigeria Airways Flight 2120

#2 with a bullet?
"Mayday" (Discovery Chanel) calls it the deadliest accident for a Canadian airline & for the DC-8. Are they wrong? TREKphiler  any time you're ready, Uhura  02:30, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The article says it's the deadliest accident for a DC-8, as well as the worst one occurring on Saudi soil, and these statements are properly sourced. A sentence saying it was the worst accident for a Canadian airliner (not airline) was removed, as it was unsupported by any reference, thus violating WP:V.--Jetstreamer Talk 10:39, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thx. (And somehow, I missed this cmt... :  TREKphiler   any time you're ready, Uhura  20:47, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Accident report details
WhisperToMe (talk) 18:41, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Aircraft Accident Report AAR 2-91 - Presidency of Civil Aviation, Ministry of Defence and Aviation Nationair Canada DC-8 (C-GMXQ) King Abdulaziz International Airport Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 11 July 1991 - 29 Dhu Al Hajjah 1411

Runway 34L
I have reverted edit. Aviation Safety Network does not mention the aircraft crashed in the nearby of runway 34L, it just mentions it took off from that runway. The companion reference mentions no runways at all. The addition was thus unsourced, and constitutes original research as well.--Jetstreamer Talk 00:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The sources show that they originally tried to return to 34L, but the situation became dire and they went for 34C instead. Abductive  (reasoning) 04:21, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * If you look at the diagram in Tire Failure on Takeoff Sets Stage for Fatal Inflight Fire and Crash you'll see that the crew asked "Need center runway we're lined up" just before the crash. The crash site is indicated by the X. Abductive  (reasoning) 02:24, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Consistency
... "#2 and No. 4 tyre pressures were below the minimum for flight dispatch" ... This is not a correct citation. The ASN accident report (reference 1) states The #2 and #4 tyre pressures were below the minimum for flight dispatch. (i.e. "#" in both cases). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.66.29.38 (talk) 20:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

"Accident" Vs "Incident"
ICAO Annex 13 defines the meaning of the words "Accident" and "Incident."

Accident: An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, in which:

a) a person is fatally or seriously injured as a result of being in the aircraft, or direct contact with any part of the aircraft, including parts which have become detached from the aircraft, or direct exposure to jet blast, except when the injuries are from natural causes, self inflicted or inflicted by other persons, or when the injuries are to stowaways hiding outside the areas normally available to the passengers and crew: or

b) the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component, except for engine failure or damage. when the damage is limited to the engine, its cowlings or accessories: or for damage limited to propellers, wing tips, antennas, tires, brakes, fairings, small dents or puncture holes in the aircraft skin: or

c) the aircraft is missing or is completely inaccessible.

Note I.-- For statistical uniformity only, an injury resulting in death within thirty days of the date of the accident is classified as a fatal injury by ICAO.

Note 2.-- An aircraft is considered to be missing when the official search has been terminated and the wreckage has not been located.

Conversely, an "Incident" is defined as "an occurrence, other than an accident, associated with the operation of an aircraft which affects or could affect the safety of operation." A "serious incident" is one that was nearly an accident, but which lacked the significant damage or injury, as defined above for the term "accident."

It is clear this article is about an airliner accident, according to the ICAO nomenclature which is subscribed to by virtually all industrialized nations, their official accident investigation bodies and all responsible aviation publications. Please do not revert back to the word "incident" without showing why you think that word is the proper one and without gaining consensus from other experienced aviation accident editors. EditorASC (talk) 04:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If you are as experienced as you claim you should know by now that you cannot add information that is not supported by sources. I've removed ″Mississauga, Ontario″ from this edit, as it is not included in the supporting source. By the way, it's ″complete″ and not ″comlete″.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 12:49, 23 July 2016 (UTC)


 * If you are so superior to other editors, as your hostile tone seems to indicate, then why did you include that ″Mississauga, Ontario″ part in your edit here? []


 * If you had spent as much time on doing your homework, as you spent on trying to dream up a way of getting even, you might have noticed that I did NOT add that portion to the paragraph. It was already there, apparently added some time ago by another editor. I did not remove it when I made my edit, and neither did you when you made your edit.


 * I do appreciate your correcting a typo though. I guess you have never made a typo mistake? EditorASC (talk) 10:16, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You are completely right about the Ontario stuff and I apologise for it.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 13:20, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Coordinates
Wikimedia Commons and WikiData have much better coordinates than this article had until I fixed them. User:Jetstreamer introduced the error. I urge him/her to revisit all of his/her instances of coordinate entry and look for errors. Abductive (reasoning) 05:23, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The infobox said (and currently says) the event took place at the airport, I don't see why coordinates pointing to the centre of the airport are in error.--Jetstreamer $Talk$ 15:21, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The sources and the article say, "crashed 2,875 metres short of runway" in the airport grounds, not on a building in the center of the airport. Abductive  (reasoning) 04:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Official account videos are not affected by WP:ELNEVER
I need to clarify if the YouTube video is on an official account, that makes it okay and not covered by WP:ELNEVER. Check the video carefully: the poster is the Smithsonian Channel, affiliated with the Smithsonian Museum in Washington, DC. The account is verified by YouTube. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:17, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Edit: External_links states: "External links to websites that display copyrighted works are acceptable as long as the website is manifestly run, maintained or owned by the copyright owner; the website has licensed the work from the owner[...]" (my emphasis added on this part)

The Smithsonian website, down on the bottom of this page has a section "more social" which links to this channel. The Smithsonian Channel airs Air Disasters and the extended description of the video identifies it as from Air Disasters ("From: AIR DISASTERS: Under Pressure"). WhisperToMe (talk) 17:55, 29 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Whisper, lets do this. I'm going to ask an administrator,  who specializes in copyvio to rule on this. I won't do any further reverseions till we hear back from them. Ok?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:24, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * WilliamJE: Good. Frankly there is a problem if the Smithsonian Channel of all people is actually posting content on their publicly visible (and verified!) YouTube channel that the copyright owner isn't aware of. I can't conceive the Smithsonian Channel violating copyvio on an official account. Also see Talk:Germanwings Flight 9525 WhisperToMe (talk) 17:27, 29 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Ask yourself this, what does adding these links to previews add to the articles? Mayday is dramatization that is not even considered a WP RS by the WP Aviation Accident. The article is about the accident and not the shows that make a episode about the accident. A link to a preview is not enhancing the article IMHO....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:32, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Those links are for the general public - people who would be willing to watch a 2-3 minute clip but not read a lengthy report. As I said on my talk page: It's why the director of The Promise stated that the public learns more from videos/films than from books. Also the Smithsonian Channel (still) has an actual educational mission. Wikipedia has a general audience: of course pseudoscience/wrong information should be kept out, and of course nothing replaces the actual accident reports/scientific analysis, but a short preview video could be used as a tool to show people unfamiliar with the field/accident what happened. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:40, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi! I was pinged and then invited here by User:WilliamJE. Kudos to both of you for discussing the matter without edit-warring over it first. My take on the main question: the Smithsonian video is uploaded by that august institution, so we don't need to worry about WP:ELNEVER or WP:LINKVIO – linking to the video is OK. I'm not going to comment on whether it should be added here, but please both bear in mind that "The burden of providing ... justification is on the person who wants to include an external link". Hope that's of some help/use to you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:21, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Much appreciated WhisperToMe (talk) 18:23, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The next step could be discussing how/when to include the Smithsonian Channel-posted videos of Air Disasters on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation page: link to samples of videos, and let other project members deliberate. I am OK with not linking to an Air Disasters clip hosted on Smithsonian if it gets something wrong or has pseudoscience, but if it's in line with the accident reports I think it has value. It could also be deliberated on a page by page basis. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:26, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * TY Just. Whisper, I think a discussion needs to be held about whether links to the videos should be in the articles but two things 1- I'm busy for the rest of today 2- I think this would be a better forum for a discussion. 3- We invite in other aviation accident editors (MilborneOne, Ahunt, Samf4u, Jetstreamer, Petebutt, Mjroots, Shelbystripes and others) for their opinions. In the meantime you and I don't revert or add more links. If you want to start the discussion at the Accident task force page and do some pinging, that's fine with me. I probably won't chime in till tonight my time or tomorrow morning. What do you think?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:34, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That's totally fine! There's no time limit for the discussions or anything. Feel free to participate when it's convenient WhisperToMe (talk) 18:42, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ WhisperToMe (talk) 18:54, 29 May 2020 (UTC)