Talk:American Airlines Flight 320

American Airlines Flight 320 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. Review: March 22, 2022. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States 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. Aviation: Accidents This article is supported by the Aviation accident project.

A fact from American Airlines Flight 320 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 June 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that although the captain of American Airlines Flight 320 was considered one of the most experienced pilots in the world, his crew was blamed for the fatal crash in 1959? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/American Airlines Flight 320.

Much of the probable cause is taken word-for-word directly from the Civil Aeronautics Board's Aircraft Accident Report on Flight 320. This is a U.S. Government work and is therefore in the public domain.

Actually, it was a mixture of word-for-word and paraphrasing, which is not a proper way to do it. Therefore, I changed it to nothing but an accurate and complete quoting of the PROBABLE CAUSE (it is in caps in the report), and then improved the link to the report so that one click gets the downloaded PDF CAB Accident Report file. It looks different than the usual link in Wiki, but what the hell, it works! 66.81.53.26 (talk) 00:45, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is that the five paragraphs that start with a quote mark are actual quotes from the NYT source. If that's the case, this needs to be formatted correctly, perhaps as a block quote, or better yet paraphrased with a proper reference. If not, those stray unclosed quote marks should be removed. Kendall-K1 (talk) 16:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not clear what is intended by: affected the opening various equipment. catslash (talk) 00:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Catslash: This isn't a super fast response, but... thank you for your feedback. I looked at the source to see what I was trying to write at the time and have reworded that. Sorry I didn't notice your comment earlier. RecycledPixels (talk) 07:42, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This review is

transcluded from Talk:American Airlines Flight 320/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GhostRiver (talk · contribs) 17:46, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article to help reduce the good article nomination backlog and to gain points in the

]

Good Article review progress box WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Infobox and lede

• "mistakes by the flight crew, the flight crew's inexperience flying the type of aircraft, and poor weather conditions were the causes of the crash" → "the crash had been caused by mistakes from the flight crew, the crew's inexperience with the type of aircraft, and poor weather conditions"

Accident

• Link "the company's" to American Airlines
• Also link
  Midway Airport and LaGuardia Airport
  at first mention, and capitalize the respective A's in "Airport"
• "had delayed the departure" → "delayed its departure"
• "Eastern time" → "(EDT)"
• "fifty four" → "fifty-four" per
  MOS:NUMERAL
• "68 passengers and 5 crew members" → "Sixty-eight passengers and five crew members" per
  MOS:NUMERAL
  (don't start sentences with numerals and don't use numerals for values less than ten)
• "Climb out of Chicago" feels a little slang-y
• "was uneventful" → "were uneventful"
• What was operating on automatic pilot? The subject of this sentence is "The climb"
• Use conversion template for cruising altitude
• "the current weather conditions" per
  MOS:REALTIME
• "with a 400 feet ceiling with a 1.25 miles visibility" → "with a ceiling of 400 feet and a visibility of 1.25 miles" to reduce repetition and fix the subject-verb disagreement created by the conversion template
• Should "runway" be capitalized in "runway 22"? I can't view the source

  The original source does not capitalize it (it uses the phrase "LaGuardia's runway 22") and the CAB Accident report uses lowercase to refer to the runway. ("...crashed into the East River while attempting an instrument approach to runway 22 at La Guardia Airport." page 1, paragraph 1).

• Link East River
• "he thought the aircraft hit at" → "he thought it did so at"
• "the whole belly" also feels non-encyclopedic
• "sounded like" → "sounded as if"
• Delink "Lockheed L-188 Electra" in the last paragraph, it was already linked

  Items in this section are addressed, with one comment added to the runway question. RecycledPixels (talk) 20:52, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath

• "when the boat's crew" or just "when its crew"
• "lighting up" → "illuminating"
• "All eight of the survivors of the crash" → "All eight who had survived the crash"
• "were saved" → "were rescued"
• Link "Coast Guard" to United States Coast Guard
• No comma needed after "and the police"
• Do we know how many "some" is in some of the initial survivors died of their injuries?

  I couldn't locate where I got "some" from the source, it only mentions one, so I've reworded that portion. I left in that the survivors were taken to the two hospitals and in the next paragraph noted that one of the nine survivors died of her injuries. I seem to recall reading that others died en route to the hospital but can't locate that in any of my clippings at the moment.

• Why is "twenty-foot" not used with the conversion factor?
• "section of the fuselage the largest intact section" way to rephrase to reduce repetition of "section"?
• "two-and-a-half" → "two and a half"
• Delink "turboprop", linked above
• The association also called for the installation of a more comprehensive instrument landing system that would have provided altitude guidance to flight crews landing on runway 22 in addition to the existing system that provided horizontal guidance Very long sentence with confusing syntax
• Which two airports were those?

  New York International airport, now named John F. Kennedy International Airport, and Newark Metropolitan Airport, now called Newark Liberty International Airport. I didn't include which airports they were because I thought it added clutter, but I've now added a footnote in case someone is curious.

  I have now addressed or responded to the items so far in this section. RecycledPixels (talk) 21:45, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft

• Delink all of "Lockheed L-188 Electra turbine propeller", as all was linked above
• Comma instead of semicolon after "catastrophic structural failures"
• "the loss of" is a
  MOS:EUPHEMISM
• Split last sentence into two for greater readability

  Done. RecycledPixels (talk) 22:03, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Passengers and crew

• "Included in the passengers who died in the crash" → "One of the crash victims was"
• Comma after "Kukla, Fran and Ollie"
• "that was broadcast" → "which was broadcast"
• "flying for the Thompson Aeronautical Corporation"?
• Comma after "Mishawaka, Indiana" and "Wilmette, Illinois" per
  MOS:GEOCOMMA
• "a broken jaw and pelvis, and two broken legs" → "fractures to his jaw, pelvis, and both legs"

  Done. RecycledPixels (talk) 22:03, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Crash investigation

• At first blush, this section is very long and dense and can probably be broken into level three subheads
• Within two hours of the accident I assume this is two hours after the crash and not a different qualifier like authorities arriving on the scene?

  I'm not sure I understand this question. The private interview between Cook and an "aviation official" took place "within two hours after the accident [sic]", according to the Chicago Tribune article.

• Use the conversion template for "one-hundred-foot increments"
• "as the weather conditions permitted"
• "and fifty percent" → "and 50 percent" per
  MOS:NUMERAL
• Link Northport, New York
• "The nose section and cockpit was" → "The nose section and cockpit were"
• "as temporary only"
• When the FAA is first mentioned, put "FAA" in parentheses afterwards, and then use the aconrym whenever you use Agency afterwards
• "that displayed hundreds of feet" → "that displayed altitude in increments of 100 feet"
• "by an unnamed Government body" → "by an unnamed government body"
• had made 10,000-foot mistakes Unclear what this means to a layperson
• Comma after "several times during the flight"
• Link first instance of Newark, New Jersey
• Flight engineer Cook Looks awkward with Flight capitalized but Engineer not
• Link "shock" to Shock (circulatory) (I believe)

  I'm not sure. He had just been fished out of an icy river, so it's possible he was experiencing

  Acute stress disorder

  is just as likely. Since I don't know which one he meant when he said he was in a state of shock, I'm not going to try to link to one or another.

• "when he would switch" → "at which point he would switch"
• "Chicago Tribune" should be italicized as the name of a publication
• Comma in "1000 feet" of "1000 feet above ground pressure level" for consistency
• "only of forty or fifty feet" → "of only 40 or 50 feet" for flow and per
  MOS:NUMERAL
• The last paragraph ends somewhat anticlimactically; we hear that the first officer hoped the airline would protest the report, so did that happen?

  I don't know. I've never been able to find anything. If it did, it might not have been reported, but no amended report was ever released by the CAB.

  All other items in this section are addressed. RecycledPixels (talk) 07:12, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Additional investigations

• Comma after "On February 6, 1959," per
  MOS:DATECOMMA
• "that if the LaGuardia runway had been equipped" → "that had the LaGuardia runway been equipped"
• "Midway airport" → "Midway Airport"

  Done. RecycledPixels (talk) 06:00, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

• When using Template:Rp for page numbers, you don't need to include "p." or "pp."
• When using Newspapers.com references, it would be nice to clip the page to just the article you're using so that those wanting to reference the information can easily find it
• Angel on the Wing doesn't look at first glance to be particularly reliable as a self-published book, but since it's a subject-matter expert (a crash survivor), I'm ok with it

  I have no idea why i used the "p" and "pp" in the {{rp}} template. I know it isn't needed. Thanks for the catch. As for the newspapers.com, it's something that I've had raised on the Pan Am Flight 7 FAC page. As I explained there, most of the larger articles don't snip well on the site, the text is so tiny that it's unreadable. The only time it's of any use is on the really short articles, (or obituaries, which is what that feature was most designed for). So providing snips of those few small articles isn't all that helpful. On my end, I literally use the screen snipping tool to cut and save the article as one or more image files on my computer so I can go back to refer to them, and some of those article snips take many images to save. Ultimately, the source was a printed newspaper, that happens to have a convenient web access as well, and I post the link for convenience for those who can access it. There are other ways to do it. As far as the book, I agree completely; and used it as a source only sparingly to describe the weather delays at departure, and her knowledge of the crew members. I've corrected the rp template, other issues in this section are done. RecycledPixels (talk) 05:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

• Image licensing looks good, checked against the original Flickr
• No stability concerns in the revision history
• Earwig score looks good, the high match is properly attributed public domain

Putting on hold for now. Please feel free to ping me with questions, and let me know when you're finished! — GhostRiver 20:30, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GhostRiver: Thank you for all the time you've spent taking a look at this, and for the improvements you have suggested. I have addressed your sections, let me know if you spot anything else or have any other questions. RecycledPixels (talk) 07:13, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making those changes, and for your patience – a window fell on my hand the other day and I have some soft tissue damage. Everything looks good, the comments still not quite addressed are ones that are beyond you (i.e. "two hours after the accident" is per source). I would still recommend clipping the newspapers when possible. In either case, everything satisfies GA, so happy to pass! — GhostRiver 22:04, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RecycledPixels:

Hi! About this edit, I linked the accident report in the external links specifically to highlight the final report. I am aware that the report is cited in the list of references, but having to wade through a sea of references will turn off a lot of casual readers (especially readers who don't know how to use CTRL+F). The final accident report is the most important external link there is for a given aviation accident, and in my opinion it needs to be linked prominently.

What can be done, however, is make the citation just a page number, and under references (for a general list of books rather than the list of inline cites), include the full citation of the accident report. See Air_France_Flight_447#Works_cited and Japan_Air_Lines_Flight_123#Bibliography which show the final accident report prominently as a list of cited references.

WhisperToMe (talk) 12:30, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]