Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/LANSA Flight 502/1

LANSA Flight 502[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: No consensus to delist. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA from 2006. Aside from the small amount of uncited material, this article is not broad enough. There is nothing in the investigation section and the article itself just looks smaller than it should be. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:21, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, the article seems to have deteriorated considerably since I left it years ago. I'll try to fix it up over the next few days, and hopefully return it to GA standards soon. Thanks, Crum375 (talk) 14:29, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Crum375, how have you got on? Do you feel the article is sufficiently improved? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:47, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's better, but needs more work. If you have specific points you think are most critical, let me know. Crum375 (talk) 00:13, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have to ask, is there anything you can use to expand the aftermath and investigation. Also, there is some uncited statements in the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:50, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Onegreatjoke, I have fixed some broken links using Wayback, and tightened the Lead and Investigation sections to rely strictly on the actual Final Report (which is in Spanish). Since I couldn't find an official English version, I included both the original and automated English translation of the "Causes" section on the Talk page, and included excerpt of the Spanish original plus English key points as a Note in the article. If you feel anything is still missing or needs improvement, or have any other comments, let me know. Thanks, Crum375 (talk) 02:36, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I discovered some more issues, will post here when resolved. Crum375 (talk) 13:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After some more fixes, I think it's OK now, but any critique/comment would be appreciated. Thanks, Crum375 (talk) 17:22, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging Onegreatjoke to see their thoughts. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.